It''''''"' 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/colonialtradeofmOOmorr 


COLONIAL  TRADE  OF  MARYLAND 
1689-1711^ 


Series  XXXii  No.  3 

JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy,  and 

Political  Science 


COLONIAL  TRADE  OF  MARYLAND 
1689-171^ 


BY 


MARGARET  SHOVE  MORRISS,  Ph.D. 
Associate  Professor  of  History,  Mount  Holyoke  College 


BALTIMORE 

THE  JOHNS   HOPKINS   PRESS 

1914 


Copyright  1914  by 
THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


PRESS  OF 

THE  NEW  ERA  PRINTING  COMPANY 

LANCASTER,  PA. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Page 

Preface   vii 

CHAPTER  I 
Staple  Products  and  Chief  Exports 

Natural  Resources  and  Food-Stuffs  lo 

Tobacco,  the  Staple  Product  and  Chief  Export 21 

Amount  of  Tobacco  Exported  to  England  and  to  the  Colonies  . .  30 

Price  of  Tobacco  36 

Revenue  Levied  by  the  British  Government  on  Imported  Tobacco  42 

Revenue  Levied  by  the  Colonial  Government  on  Exported  Tobacco  47 

Naval  Stores  52 

CHAPTER  n 
Imports 

Variety  and  Amounts  of  Goods  Imported  from  England 58 

Manufactures  in  Maryland 65 

Importation  of  White  Servants  76 

Importation  of  Negroes   79 

Other  Imports  from  Foreign  Countries  81 

Imports  from  the  English  Colonies 82 

CHAPTER  III 
Trade  Routes  and  Illicit  Trade 

Number  of  Ships  Concerned  in  the  Trade  with  England 85 

Conditions  of  Lading,  and  Protection  of  the  Tobacco  Fleets  ...  89 

Influence  of  English  Merchants  in  the  Regulation  of  the  Trade  .  95 

Methods  of  Payment  for  Tobacco  io3 

Trade  Routes  from  Maryland  to  Foreign  Countries 107 

Trade  Routes  to  the  English  Colonies  i09 

Maryland  Shipping  ^ ^4 

Illicit  Trade  "6 

Trade  with  Pirates  ^29 

APPENDICES 
I.  Naval  Stores  Exported  from  Virginia  and  Maryland,  1698- 


1717 


134 


II.  List  of  English  Manufactured  and  Foreign  Goods  Exported 

from  England  to  Virginia  and  Maryland,  1699 i39 

Bibliography    -^47 


PREFACE 

The  purpose  of  this  paper  is  to  show  the  place  which  the 
province  of  Maryland  held  in  the  British  colonial  system. 
Maryland  was  one  of  the  two  continental  colonies  which 
were  regarded  as  satisfactory  to  the  home  country  from  the 
mercantilist  point  of  view.  As  the  connection  with  Great 
Britain  was  especially  close  during  the  twenty-five  years 
when  the  colony  was  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  it  has  seemed 
best  to  analyze  its  trade  relationships  during  those  years. 
The  attempt  has  been  made  to  indicate  its  exact  value  to 
Great  Britain:  (i)  as  a  source  for  the  supply  of  raw  mate- 
rial, that  is,  tobacco,  which  had  to  be  shipped  directly  to 
England;  (2)  as  a  market  for  British  manufactures  and 
foreign  goods  through  Great  Britain  as  an  entrepot;  (3) 
as  the  terminus  of  a  line  of  trade  which  employed  a  large 
number  of  English  ships  and  sailors.  The  description  of 
British  colonial  policy  as  a  whole  is  the  task  of  Mr.  G.  L. 
Beer  in  the  admirable  series  of  volumes  now  appearing.  The 
results  reached  in  this  presentation  of  trade  conditions  in 
Maryland  between  1689  and  171 5  tend  to  confirm  the  con- 
clusions of  Mr.  Beer  for  the  earlier  development  of  the  colo- 
nial system. 

The  materials  used,  aside  from  the  printed  records  in  the 
Archives  of  Maryland,  have  been  found  for  the  most  part  in 
the  Public  Record  Office  in  London  among  the  Colonial 
Office  Papers.  Of  the  greatest  value  was  a  volume  of  Mary- 
land Naval  Office  papers  for  the  period,  containing  lists  of 
ships  and  their  ladings.  The  Custom  House  Accounts  in 
the  Record  Office  furnished  statements  of  the  imports  and 
exports  to  and  from  Virginia  and  Maryland  between  1689 
and  171 5.  Much  general  information  has  been  secured 
from  published  and  unpublished  letters  of  the  colonial  gov- 

vii 


VIU 


PREFACE 


ernors  to  the  Board  of  Trade  and  the  secretary  of  state. 
These  were  often  largely  concerned  with  trade  conditions. 
This  study  was  undertaken  at  the  suggestion  of  Professor 
Charles  M.  Andrews  of  Yale  University  when  he  was  at 
Bryn  Mawr  College,  and  the  author  is  indebted  to  him  for 
very  generous  assistance  at  every  stage  of  her  inquiry.  Pro- 
fessor William  Roy  Smith  of  Bryn  Mawr  College  has  made 
many  valuable  criticisms  in  arrangement  and  form.  The 
year  1913-1914  has  been  spent  by  the  writer  at  the  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  and  it  is  a  pleasure  to  acknowledge  the 
courtesy  of  Professor  John  H.  Latane  of  that  institution. 
The  kindness  of  the  editors  of  the  Johns  Hopkins  University 
Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science  in  allowing  the 
dissertation  to  be  published  in  that  series  is  greatly  appreci- 
ated. Thanks  are  due  also  to  Dr.  Frances  Davenport  of 
the  Department  of  Historical  Research  of  the  Carnegie 
Institution  for  the  use  of  unpublished  references,  to  Mr. 
Hubert  Hall  for  his  assistance  when  the  author  was  in 
London,  and  to  Dr.  Ellen  D.  Ellis  of  Mount  Holyoke  Col- 
lege for  many  helpful  suggestions. 

M.  S.  M. 


COLONIAL  TRADE  OF  MARYLAND,  1689-1715 


CHAPTER  I 
Staple  Products  and  Chief  Exports 

Maryland  became  a  royal  province  in  1692.  At  that  time 
the  belt  of  settlement  was  still  comparatively  narrow,  al- 
though the  colony  had  been  occupied  for  more  than  fifty 
years.  The  chief  means  of  communication  between  the  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  colony  and  between  the  colony  as  a  whole 
and  the  outer  world  was  by  water.  The  result  was  that 
plantations  were  scattered  from  the  head  of  the  bay  along 
both  shores  to  the  Potomac  and  Somerset  Rivers  and  up  the 
banks  of  all  the  navigable  streams.  The  settlements  were 
not  evenly  distributed  within  this  narrow  district,  for  the 
inhabitants  were  still  clustered  in  greater  numbers  where  the 
colony  had  first  been  seated, — along  the  Potomac  and  the 
Patuxent  and  around  St.  Mary's  and  Annapolis.^  Across 
the  bay,  too,  plantations  were  concentrated  along  the  Chop- 
tank,  Elk,  and  Chester  Rivers  and  farther  south  in  Dor- 
chester and  Somerset  Counties.  The  controversy  over  the 
collection  of  taxes  in  the  boundary  dispute  with  Pennsylvania 
shows  that  there  were  a  few  settlements  in  Cecil  County 
north  of  Chesapeake  Bay.- 

At  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  there  was  little 
thought  of  the  possibility  of  occupying  the  region  back  of 
this  tide-water  district.  In  1695  Governor  Nicholson  com- 
plained to  the  Duke  of  Shrewsbury  that  on  account  of  the 
scarcity  of  land  young  men  were  leaving  Virginia  and  Mary- 
land, "  where  land  is  grown  scarce  to  be  taken  up,  by  reason 

1  N.  D.  Mereness,  Maryland  as  a  Proprietary  Province,  p.  105. 

2  Archives  of  Maryland,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  85,  87. 

9 


10  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [452 

of  the  great  Tracts  that  single  persons  have,  and  will  not  part 
with  but  at  unreasonable  rates.  So  that  as  our  people  in- 
crease, they  are  in  a  manner  necessitated  to  look  out  for 
new  Countrys."^  It  was  not  until  the  Germans  from  the 
Palatinate  came  into  Pennsylvania  and  the  western  part  of 
Maryland  that  settlements  in  the  latter  colony  spread  appre- 
ciably beyond  the  tide-water. 

The  region  to  which  the  seventeenth  century  settlements 
were  confined  was  a  flat,  thickly  wooded  country.  Hugh 
Jones  wrote  home  in  1698  that  in  the  settlements  there  was 
"no  Hill  .  .  .  fifty  yards  perpendicular  but  about  100  miles 
backe  or  west  of  us  .  .  .  the  ground  rises.  ...  All  the  low 
land  is  verry  wooddy  like  one  continued  forrest  no  part  clear 
but  what  is  cleared  by  the  English  And  tho  Ave  are  pretty 
closely  seated  yett  we  cannot  See  our  next  neighbours  house 
for  trees."  He  further  explains  that  there  had  already  been 
much  clearing  of  land.* 

The  nature  of  the  country  that  had  been  settled  and  the 
large  number  of  waterways  indicate  what  would  supposedly 
be  the  chief  resources  of  the  colony.  The  thick  woods  which 
still  surrounded  so  many  of  the  plantations  furnished  an 
abundance  of  game, — deer,  bear,  and  many  varieties  of  wild 
fowl,  especially  turkeys.  They  also  supplied  enough  mast 
to  feed  the  stock,  which  for  the  most  part  ranged  the  woods. 
Thus  the  planters  were  assured  of  an  abundant  support  from 
the  natural  products  of  the  land  with  little  effort  on  their 
own  part,  but  although  they  lived  largely  by  hunting  and 
fishing,  we  shall  see  that  from  earliest  times  neither  furs  nor 
fish  played  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  commercial  activities 
of  the  colonists. 

Of  the  fisheries  this  is  especially  true.  There  is  abundant 
testimony  that  the  bay  and  the  rivers  teemed  with  fish,  as 
indeed  they  do  today,  and  the  diflferent  kinds  were  much 

3  Colonial  Office  Papers,  5:  719,  18;  see  also  a  letter  of  Governor 
Nicholson  to  the  Board  of  Trade,  in  C.  O.  5 :  7i4,  25;  and  Archives, 
vol.  xxiii,  p.  87. 

4  Reverend  Hugh  Jones  to  Dr.  Benjamin  Woodroof,  in  Royal 
Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 


453]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  II 

esteemed  for  home  consumption.  The  author  of  the  Nar- 
rative of  a  Voyage  to  Maryland,  writing  in  1705,  mentions 
perch  of  all  varieties,  rockfish,  catfish,  drum,  of  which  we 
read,  "  an  admirable  fish  the  inhabbitants  make  much  account 
of  'em  indeavering  to  Ketch  as  many  as  they  can  in  a  season 
salting  'em  up  to  eat  att  other  times,"  sheepshead,  eels,  her- 
ring, of  which  great  quantities  came  up  "  to  the  heads  of  the 
Rivers  into  the  f  freshes  to  spawne  the  inhabbitants  gett  great 
numbers  of  'em  which  are  a  mighty  help  to  great  Families," 
and  abundance  of  shad  and  sturgeon,  which  were,  however, 
not  much  esteemed,  although  their  size  was  a  source  of 
wonder  to  the  people.^  With  all  this  abundance  of  fish  there 
was  no  effort  made  to  salt  them  for  exportation.  There  is 
not  a  single  record  of  fish  exported  to  England  between  1696 
and  1715,  and  the  same  is  probably  true  for  earlier  years.'' 
Apparently,  also,  none  were  sent  to  any  of  the  other  colonies. 
During  the  early  years  of  the  colony  the  Indian  fur  trade 
was  monopolized  by  Lord  Baltimore,  but  by  1650,  probably 
because  it  had  not  proved  as  profitable  as  was  expected,  it  had 
been  thrown  open  to  the  public.  A  statute  passed  in  that 
year  required  each  trader  to  obtain  a  license  and  to  reserve 
one  tenth  of  his  profits  for  the  proprietor,  but  all  licenses 
were  to  be  freely  granted.'^  Between  1650  and  1681  several 
licenses  were  issued,  but  the  trade  was  evidently  not  suffi- 
ciently lucrative  to  prove  very  tempting.^  After  1682  the 
inhabitants,  feeling  perhaps  that  the  proprietary  percentage 
was  too  large,  made  a  number  of  attempts  to  adjust  the  trade 
more  satisfactorily.  The  Lower  House  of  Assembly  pro- 
posed at  least  twice  that  the  necessity  for  obtaining  a  license 
should  be  removed  and  the  percentage  reduced.^  The  Coun- 
cil, however,  vetoed  the  proposals  on  the  ground  that  it 

5  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum.  Printed  in  American  His- 
torical Review,  vol.  xii,  pp.  327-340. 

^  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  vols. 
i-xvi.     Inspector  General's  Accounts,  vol.  i. 

''  Archives,  vol.  i,  p.  307. 

8  Ibid.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  443,  445;  vol.  v.  pp.  38,  84,  106;  vol.  xv,  pp. 
25s,  352. 

9  Ibid.,  vol.  vii,  pp.  301,  381,  383,  385. 


12  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [454 

would  be  dangerous  to  allow  free  trade  with  the  Indians,  and 
thus  the  license  system  remained  in  effect  throughout  the 
proprietary  period. ^° 

After  the  establishment  of  the  royal  government,  the  ques- 
tion of  fur  licenses  was  again  agitated  by  the  Lower  House 
and,  apparently  in  October,  1695,^^  a  decision  was  reached 
that  a  small  export  duty  on  furs  should  be  substituted  for 
the  license  system.^^  The  customs  collected  were  to  be 
doubled  for  aliens  or  for  those  not  trading  directly  with 
England.  This  law  was  reenacted  at  least  once,"  and  the 
money  from  the  duty  on  furs  was  used  for  the  benefit  of 
the  free  school  at  Annapolis. 

Although  the  effort  to  adjust  the  fur  trade  indicates  that 
it  played  an  appreciable  part  in  Maryland  commerce,  the 
imperfection  of  the  records  makes  it  difficult  to  estimate  its 
character  and  extent.  Undoubtedly  the  principal  skins  ex- 
ported were  those  of  the  smaller  animals, — beaver,  wildcat, 
raccoon,  fox,  mink,  and  muskrat,  with  occasionally  a  few 

10  A  law  of  1692  prohibiting  trade  with  the  Indians  without  a 
hcense  indicates  that  the  same  policy  was  continued  at  first  under 
the  royal  governors  (Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  560). 

^^  In  an  account  of  the  public  revenue  the  collection  of  a  duty  on 
fur  before  October,  1695,  is  twice  mentioned.  One  item  records 
duties  received  from  May  28,  1695,  and  the  other  states :  "  By  ditto 
[Major  Robert  King]  his  account  for  Skins  exported  since  the 
making  the  act  to  the  26  day  7""  1695  "  (An  Acct  of  Cash  for  the 
Publick  Revenue  of  the  province  beginning  the  15th  of  October  1695 
and  Ending  December  the  nth  1696,  in  C.  O.  5 :  749).  There  is  no 
record  of  a  law  establishing  fur  duties  until  October,  1695 ;  and  as 
late  as  October,  1694,  it  was  definitely  stated  that  the  old  license 
act  was  not  to  be  changed  (Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  85).  The  law  may 
have  been  retroactive,  hut  there  is  nothing  in  the  bill  to  indicate  it. 

12  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  276.     This  duty  was  regulated  as  follows  : — 

Skin  Duty  Skin  Duty 

Bear 

Beaver 

Otter 

Wildcat 

Fox 

Mink 

Fisher  lYz  d. 

13  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  275.  This  law  was  to  be  in  force  for  an 
indefinite  length  of  time. 


0 

d. 

4 

d. 

3 

d. 

1/2 

d. 

1/2 

d. 

i^  d. 

Wolf 

lYz  d. 

Muskrat 

4      d.  per  doz. 

Raccoon 

Va  d. 

Elk 

12      d. 

Deer 

4      d. 

Young  bear 

2      d. 

455]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  1 3 

larger  skins,— bear,  wolf,  or  elk."  Apparently  no  accurate 
record  was  ever  kept  of  the  number  of  skins  exported,  but 
the  duty  collected  from  furs  for  the  four  years  from  1695 
to  1698  inclusive  was  £154.  4s.  9^^.,^=  an  amount  which  is 
comparatively  small,  even  when  the  low  rates  of  the  duties 
are  considered. 

Moreover,  the  export  was  not  only  small  in  quantity  but  it 
was  inconsiderable  in  value.  The  best  general  estimate — 
and  only  vague  estimates  are  possible — would  place  the  total 
value  of  the  furs  exported  to  England  in  1695  at  about 


14  C.    0. 

5:  749,  passim; 

Archives,  vol. 

xxiii, 

p. 

168. 

Sample 

list  of  furs  exported  from 

Pc 

icomoke  District 

in  1695 

Number  of  Skins 

Duty 

Amount  of  Di 

iity 

L 

s. 

d. 

Bear 

9 

9      d. 

0 

6 

9 

Beaver 

42 

4      d. 

0 

14 

0 

Otter 

70 

3       d. 

0 

17 

9 

Mink 

893 

\V2  d. 

5 

II 

7 

Raccoon 

2084 

34  d. 

6 

10 

3 

Fox 

445 

Va  d. 

I 

7 

9^/4 

Muskrat 

239  doz. 

4      d. 

per  doz. 

3 

19 

0 

Cub 

5 

2      d. 

0 

0 

10 

Wildcat 

20 

i^  d. 

0 

2 

6 

Total  19        10  554 

Account  of  the  public  revenue,  1695-1696,  in  C.  O.  5 :  749-  This  list 
is  copied  from  the  records.  There  are  three  errors  of  a  few  pence 
in  the  multiplication. 

15  Records  for  the  year  1698  contain  an  account  of  the  money  col- 
lected from  1695  to  1698  from  the  fur  duty  for  the  use  of  the  free 
schools : — 

By  Maj.  Whittington's  account  for  furs 

"        "     King's  account  paid  governor 

"        "     Smithson's  account  for  furs 

"    Mr.  Watkin's  account  for  furs 

"    James    Dashield's    account    in    Mr.    Bladen's 
hands 

"    Maj.  Smithson's  later  account 

"    Mr.  West's  for  account  sworn  to  Sept.  1698 

Total  154  4  9)4 

Journal  of  CommiUee  especially  appointed  to  inspect  the  public 
accompts  of  the  revenue  of  this  province  January  2,  1698/9,  m  L.  O. 

5  '■  749-  •  •  J         f 

As  the  duties  charged  were  not  uniform,  this  list  gives  no  idea  ot 
the  number  of  skins  of  each  kind  exported  annually.  The  duty  col- 
lected per  annum  would  be  about  £38,  of  which  Pocomoke  District 
paid  slightly  more  than  one  half  (cf.  footnote  14)- 


i. 

s. 

d. 

28 

18 

8 

16 

8 

2 

56 

II 

6 

28 

16 

0 

I 

10 

10 

3 

9 

7 

18 

9 

10^/4 

14  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [45^ 

£648;^*'  and  the  amount  probably  varied  little  from  year  to 
year.  The  inhabitants  of  Maryland  never  exported  to  Eng- 
land furs  of  sufficient  value  to  tempt  many  people  into  the 
trade. 

Fully  eighty  per  cent  of  the  furs  were  exported  from  the 
Eastern  Shore/^  indicating  that  the  trapping  was  probably 
done  by  white  men  within  the  settled  parts  of  the  colony, 
where  there  were  still  small  fur-bearing  animals. ^^  Gov- 
ernor Blakiston  wrote  to  the  Board  of  Trade  that  the  people 
of  Maryland,  being  afraid  of  the  western  Indians,  did  not 
want  to  trade  with  them.^** 


16  This  estimate  is  based  on  the  following  calculation  :— 

Value  of  skins  in  Maryland  for  1697  (an  average  year) 

Original  Cost  or  Value 

s. 

d. 

Bear  (cub  probably  worth  J^)                                 6 
Beaver                                                                          4 
Otter                                                                             3 
Mink                                                                                2 
Raccoon                                                                        i 
Fox                                                                                   2 
Muskrat 
Wildcat                                                                            2 

6 
9 

6 

4 
6 

Custom  House  Accounts.    Inspector  General's  Accounts,  vol.  i,  Im- 
ports from  Virginia  and  Maryland. 

The  total  value  of  the  furs  exported  from  Pocomoke  District  was 
therefore  as  follows  : — 

Number  of  Skins  Value 

Bear  9 

Beaver  42 

Otter  70 

Mink  893 

Raccoon  2084 

Fox  445 

Muskrat  239  doz. 

Cub  5 

Wildcat  20 

Total  324  3  9 

If,  as  is  stated  in  footnote  15,  the  furs  sent  from  Pocomoke  for 
1695  were  one  half  the  total  for  the  year,  the  complete  amount  would 
be  £648.  7s.  6d.,  the  value  of  the  furs  exported  from  Maryland  in  169S. 

1^  This  is  true  because  five  of  the  officers  contributing  to  the  fur 
duty  of  1695-1698  (footnote  15)  held  office  on  the  Eastern  Shore. 
The  sums  paid  in  by  them  amounted  to  £123.  17s.  9^d.,  or  more 
than  80  per  cent  of  the  total  amount  collected  for  the  four  years. 

IS  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

19  C.  O.  5 :  715,  39- 


£. 

s. 

d. 

2 

18 

6 

8 

8 

0 

13 

2 

6 

89 

6 

0 

104 

4 

0 

55 

12 

b 

47 

16 

0 

0 

6 

3 

2 

10 

0 

457]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  1 5 

In  the  production  of  food-stuffs  the  colonists  had  no  more 
interest  than  in  trapping  or  fishing.  When  the  province  was 
first  settled  the  virgin  soil  was  extremely  fertile,  so  rich  in 
fact  that,  according  to  a  contemporary  authority,  English 
wheat  would  not  grow  until  Indian  corn  or  tobacco  was  first 
planted  to  take  off  some  of  the  rankness.-*^  It  was  not,  there- 
fore, because  the  soil  was  unfavorable  to  the  growth  of 
grain  that  so  little  planting  was  done ;  it  was  because  it  was 
still  easier  and  far  more  profitable  to  grow  tobacco.  In  the 
first  years  of  the  settlement  the  colonists  began  to  plant  this 
commodity  to  the  exclusion  of  corn,  preferring  to  buy  their 
grain  from  the  Indians  or  to  import  it  from  other  colonies 
rather  than  plant  it  themselves.  The  colonial  government 
made  great  efforts  to  prevent  the  exclusive  production  of 
tobacco  by  decreeing  that  everyone  who  planted  it  should 
grow  also  two  acres  of  corn.  This  law  was  renewed  several 
times  until  1654,21  and  was  then  allowed  to  lapse,  probably 
because  the  colony  had  been  induced  to  support  itself  in 
ordinary  years.  Edward  Randolph  stated  in  1676,  however, 
that  New  England  sent  food-stuffs — peas,  flour,  biscuit,  malt, 
codfish,  and  mackerel — to  Maryland  in  return  fortobacco.^^ 
Evidently  a  watch  had  still  to  be  kept  over  the  food  supply. 
Whenever  there  was  a  bad  year  or  danger  of  Indian  wars, 
proclamations  were  issued  forbidding  the  exportation  of 
food-stuffs,  and  the  frequency  of  these  indicates  that  the 
supply  barely  sufficed  for  the  needs  of  the  colony  itself.^^ 

By  the  end  of  the  century  this  condition  of  affairs  had 
somewhat  improved.  The  principal  crop  was  Indian  corn 
or  maize,  which,  cooked  with  pork  into  a  kind  of  hominy, 
formed  the  chief  article  of  food  among  the  lower  classes.^* 

20  A  Relation  of  Maryland,  1635.  Sabin  reprint,  New  York,  1865, 
p.  21;  also  in  C.  C.  Hall,  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland,  p.  81. 

21  Archives,  vol.  i,  pp.  79,  97,  160,  251,  349. 

22  To  the  Lords  of  Trade.  An  Answer  to  severall  Heads  of  En- 
quiry concerning  the  present  State  of  New  England.  October,  1676. 
In  Additional  MSS.  28089,  f.  16,  British  Museum. 

23  Archives,  vol.  iii,  pp.  194,  29^  443;  vol.  xvii,  pp.  48,  179,  269, 
27s;  vol.  XV,  pp.  44,  194- 

24Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 


1 6  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [4 5 8 

The  inhabitants  also  raised  Enghsh  wheat  to  a  considerable 
extent,  and  many  vegetables, — beans,  peas,  carrots,  turnips, 
and  potatoes.-^  The  soil  of  the  colony  was  light  and  sandy, 
and  although  its  virgin  fertility  was  gone,  it  still  proved  very 
favorable  for  the  production  of  grain.-**  One  writer  de- 
clared that  Indian  corn  would  yield  five  or  six  hundred  fold 
with  from  four  to  six  ears  on  a  stalk,^^  a  statement  which  is 
without  doubt  somewhat  exaggerated.  The  Lower  House 
was  agreed  that  because  of  the  partial  exhaustion  of  the  land 
by  many  years  of  tobacco  planting  it  "  thereby  becomes  bet- 
ter for  tillage."-^  The  supply  of  grain  for  home  consump- 
tion was  large  enough  to  make  the  colony  amply  self- 
sufficing. 

The  question  whether  by  1689  the  province  had  begun  to 
grow  food-stuffs  for  export  is  a  different  one  and  is  harder 
to  settle  definitely.  The  evidence  of  the  records  is  some- 
what contradictory.  Certainly  in  1690  grain  was  sent  from 
Maryland  to  New  England.^^  On  the  other  hand,  as  the 
result  of  a  bad  harvest  in  1695  it  was  forbidden  to  export 
corn  from  the  province.^"  In  1697  there  was  a  plentiful 
harvest,^^  perhaps  because  the  people  were  beginning  to  re- 
alize that  they  must  plan  to  raise  sufficient  grain  to  feed  their 
stock,  among  which  there  had  been  great  mortality.  The 
Assembly,  in  reporting  the  exportation  of  some  wheat  and 
flour  to  Barbadoes  in  1697,^-  expressly  stated  that  such  ex- 
portation was  unusual,  as  the  harvest  was  ordinarily  con- 
sumed at  home.^^     The  same  year  the  grand  jury  of  the 

25  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

26  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I.  106. 

2^^  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

2s  Archives,  vol.  xix,  pp.  540,  580. 

29  Answer  of  Sir  Edmund  Andros  to  his  instructions.  Against 
the  instruction  to  give  an  account  of  Massachusetts  is  vv^ritten  in 
part,  "  They  get  their  meat  from  Plymouth,  Rhode  Island  and  Con- 
necticut, grain  from  Connecticut,  New  York,  Maryland  and  Penn- 
sylvania" (Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series,  1689-1692, 
no.  862). 

2°  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  327. 

21  Ibid.,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  149. 

^2  Ibid.,  vol.  xix,  p.  540. 

23  Ibid.,  p.  542. 


459]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  1/ 

Maryland  provincial  court  refused  to  encourage  the  exporta- 
tion of  wheat  and  flour  to  Newfoundland  in  spite  of  Gov- 
ernor Stoughton's  appeal  to  the  colony  on  behalf  of  the 
expedition  to  Canada,  alleging  that  such  encouragement 
would  injure  Alaryland's  trade  in  provisions  to  Barbadoes.^* 
But  the  Barbadoes  trade  must  have  been  small.  The  records 
indicate  that  in  five  years  only  one  small  vessel  cleared  from 
Pocomoke  for  Barbadoes  with  provisions,  although  the  same 
district  sent  small  amounts  of  grain  to  New  York,  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  New  England  somewhat  more  frequently.^^ 
Other  similar  records  have  not  been  preserved,  but  if  the 
figures  are  proportionate  for  other  districts,  certainly  the 
exportation  of  food-stufifs  from  Maryland,  either  to  Barba- 
does or  to  any  of  the  colonies,  must  have  been  inconsider- 
able during  the  whole  period  of  the  royal  governors.^° 

In  general,  then,  the  colony  was  only  self-sufficing,  and 
in  northern  Maryland  food-stuffs  were  actually  imported. 
Bread  and  flour  were  brought  in  by  land  from  Pennsyl- 
vania.^' One  Pennsylvania  writer  indeed  asserted  that  Mary- 
land made  little  or  no  bread  or  flour  and  constantly  obtained 
these  commodities,  as  well  as  wine,  rum,  and  sugar,  from  his 
colony.^^  However  that  may  have  been,  it  would  certainly 
seem  that  in  the  last  decade  of  the  seventeenth  century  north- 
s'* Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  147,  2(yT,  C.  O.  5 :  741,  pp.  371-373- 
35  For  Pocomoke  District  from  1697-1701  there  is  a_  definite, 
although  probably  incomplete,  record  of  the  number  of  ships  clear- 
ing for  other  colonies  laden  with  provisions : — 

For  New  England       4  vessels 

"     Pennsylvania        4        " 

"     New  York  5 

"     Port  Lewes  i        " 

"    Barbadoes  i         " 

The  amount  of  grain  exported  is  in  no  case  stated,  but  as  the  burden 

of  the  vessels  was  very  small  the  quantity  shipped  must  have  been 

small  (C.  O.  5:  749). 

2'5  Indeed  at  the  very  end  of  the  period  the  exportation  of  corn 
was  again  forbidden  by  the  Council  (x^rchives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  294),  but 
in  1712  Lloyd  reported  to  the  Board  of  Trade  that  Maryland  sent 
some  Indian  corn  and  wheat  to  Lisbon,  New  England,  and  Madeira. 
This  must  have  been  a  small  amount,  as  there  is  no  record  of  such 
shipments   (C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  63). 
"^"^  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  87. 
38  C.  O.  5 :  1257,  4. 
2 


1 8  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [460 

ern  Maryland  was  still  unable  to  grind  and  bake  enough 
flour  and  bread  for  home  consumption  and  was  forced  to 
import  from  the  Quaker  colony.  The  royal  government, 
however,  remained  true  to  the  proprietary  policy  of  encour- 
aging the  province  to  become  self-supporting.  It  also  feared 
that  the  Pennsylvania  merchants  would  draw  off  Maryland 
coin  in  payment  for  their  bread.  For  these  reasons  it  pro- 
hibited this  trade  with  Pennsylvania,  a  prohibition  which 
was  continued  with  one  short  interval  until  after  1715.^'*  By 
means  of  legislation  Alaryland  was  thus  forced  to  plant  at 
least  sufficient  corn  to  be  independent  of  her  neighbors,  but 
it  is  evident  that  she  was  always  little  more  than  barely 
independent.  The  conclusion  of  the  whole  question  of  ex- 
portation of  food-stuffs  is  well  expressed  in  Governor  Hart's 
answers  to  the  queries  of  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1720:  "  The 
Soil  is  of  different  kinds,  but  most  of  it  sandy  and  of  various 
colours:  which  when  cultivated  Vv^ith  little  labour  gives  a 
vast  increase,  and  produces  all  things  necessary  for  Life,  that 
Great  Britain  affords;  with  which  the  Inhabitants  plenti- 
fully provide  for  their  subsistence,  and  might  have  sufficient 
to  vend  at  foreign  marketts  but  that  the  making  of  tobacco 
imploys  all  their  time  and  care."*''  There  was  no  lack  of 
food,  and  the  colony  had  been  made  self-supporting  partly 
by  natural  means  and  partly  by  legislation ;  but  even  at  the 
close  of  the  century  there  was  practically  no  systematic  ex- 
port of  grain  or  other  food-stuffs  to  other  colonies. 

Fruit  also  was  raised  at  this  time  for  home  consumption 
but  not  for  export.  When  the  first  settlement  was  made,  the 
colonists  had  planted  a  large  stock  of  fruit  trees,— apples, 
pears,  and  peaches.  This  planting  must  have  been  contin- 
ued with  good  results,  as  many  varieties  of  fruit  were  plenti- 
ful in  the  colony  by  the  end  of  the  century.  A  traveller  to 
Maryland  in  1705  described  an  "abundance  of  fruits  of  all 
sorts  as  aple  Peare  Cherry  quinces  in  great  quantitys  and 


39  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  314;  vol.  xxvii,  pp.   172,  482,  574;  vol. 
xxix,  pp.  238,  310,  328. 

40  c.  o.  5: 717, 1-  106. 


461]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND    CHIEF   EXPORTS  1 9 

innumerable  Quantities  Peaches  to  that  degree  that  they 
knock  downe  Bushells  att  a  time  for  there  hogs,  besides  what 
vast  quantities  they  still  and  make  a  verry  good  spirritt  off 
nott  much  inferior  to  Brandy,"*^  He  also  reported  that 
brandy  was  distilled  from  cider,  which  was  made  in  great 
quantities.  This  testimony  to  the  abundance  of  apples  is 
confirmed  by  an  earlier  letter  from  Maryland  in  which  it  was 
stated  that  cider  was  the  chief  drink  of  the  country.*^  In 
spite  of  the  great  quantity  of  fruit  of  all  kinds,  the  exporta- 
tion of  fruit  was  limited  to  an  occasional  shipment  of  apples 
or  cider  from  the  Eastern  Shore.*^ 

One  other  source  of  food  supply  remains  to  be  noted.  The 
first  domestic  animals,  principally  cattle  and  hogs,  in  the 
province  of  Maryland  were  imported  from  Virginia  at  the 
time  of  the  arrival  of  the  colonists.  This  stock  increased 
rapidly,  but  toward  the  end  of  the  century  great  mortality 
prevailed  among  the  animals  on  account  of  the  cold  winters 
and  the  lack  of  food.  At  first  no  special  provision  had  been 
made  for  food  for  the  domestic  animals,  which  were  branded 
and  turned  out  into  the  woods  to  fatten  on  mast  until  needed 
for  use.  Various  attempts  were  made  to  secure  the  colo- 
nists against  theft  of  their  stock,  and  a  system  of  wood- 
rangers  was  instituted  to  range  for  unbranded  cattle  and  to 
protect  the  branded  animals.**  These  efforts  at  protection 
were  not  especially  successful.  Men  complained  that  the 
Indians  were  great  thieves  and  that  even  the  rangers  were 
dishonest.*^     But  the  advantages  of  this  easy  means  of  ob- 

*^  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

^2  Royal  Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 

^^  C.  O.  5 :  749,  Accounts  for  Pocomoke  District. 

*4  Archives,  vol.  i,  p.  418.  In  1663  this  law  was  repealed  (ibid., 
vol.  i,  p.  486),  but  during  the  period  of  royal  government  the  rangers 
were  again  provided  for  (ibid.,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  280;  vol.  xxvi,  p.  309). 

*^  To  protect  cattle  ranging  the  woods  it  was  made  theft  for  a 
man  to  kill  marked  cattle,  or  those  unmarked  save  on  his  own  land 
(Archives,  vol.  i,  p.  251;  vol.  xiii,  p.  477).  The  wood-rangers  were 
later  accused  of  driving  off  and  killing  tame  animals,  as  well  as 
the  unbranded  ones  to  which  they  had  a  right  (ibid.,  vol.  xxiv,  p. 
280).  Laws  concerning  the  Indians  were  first  made  as  early  as 
1666,  when  the  settlers  were  forbidden  to  buy  flesh  from  the  Indians 
lest  they  had  procured  their  meat  by  killing  the  settlement  stock 
(ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  130;  vol.  xxii,  p.  463). 


20  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-1715  [462 

taining  food  for  the  stock  long  outweighed  the  disadvan- 
tages, and  on  the  frontiers  people  continued  to  allow  their 
cattle  and  hogs  to  range  the  woods.*''  In  the  older  settle- 
ments, where  the  woods  had  become  less  thick,  the  severe 
winters  and  the  lack  of  food  finally  caused  the  loss  of  large 
numbers  of  animals,'*'  and  taught  the  inhabitants  to  house 
and  feed  their  stock  in  winter.*^  Not  until  this  lesson  had 
been  learned  and  the  mortality  at  the  end  of  the  century 
repaired  was  Governor  Seymour  able  to  report  that  most  of 
the  people  "  have  good  Tracts  of  Land  and  Stocks  of  Cattle 
and  hoggs."*'' 

In  spite  of  the  adequate  supply  of  stock,  however,  the  in- 
habitants were  on  the  whole  little  more  willing  or  able  to 
raise  cattle  for  export  than  they  were  to  grow  grain  or  fruit. 
Before  1674  it  may  have  been  customary  to  make  some  small 
shipments  of  cattle  from  Maryland,^"  but  in  October  of  that 
year  the  exportation  without  license  of  all  flesh  was  for- 
bidden by  proclamation,"  probably  because  the  supply  in  the 
colony  was  barely  sufficient  for  its  own  needs.  Randolph's 
assertion  that  New  England  sent  beef  and  pork  into  Mary- 
land would  tend  to  confirm  this  view.^'-  In  1695  a  small 
duty,  evidently  not  meant  to  be  prohibitive,  was  substituted 
for  the  earlier  prohibition,-'''^  but  even  after  this  date  the  ex- 
portation of  beef  and  pork  in  any  one  year  apparently  never 
exceeded  one  hundred  and  eighty  barrels,^*  shipped  in  small 
amounts  to  the  other  colonies. 

*^  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

47  An  account  of  the  cattle  and  hogs  which  died  in  1694-95  places 
the  mortality  very  high  indeed:  25,429  cattle  died,  and  62,373  hogs 
(Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  269;  C.  O.  5 :  7i3,  "4;  C.  O.  5 :  7I4,  6). 

**  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  89. 

49  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  41- 

50  The  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  wrote  to  Andrew  Percivall,  who  was 
going  to  Maryland  in  1674,  to  enquire  in  Bermuda  the  price  of  cattle 
so  as  to  know  whether  "  to  furnish  himself  from  Maryland,  for  he 
is  not  without  further  order  to  trade  either  to  New  York  or  Vir- 
ginia" (Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1669-1674,  no.  1284). 

51  Archives,  vol.  xv,  pp.  44,  194;  vol.  xvii,  p.  48. 

52  Add.  MSS.  28089,  f.  16,  British  Museum. 

53  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  276. 

5*  Ibid.,  p.  539;  C.  O.  S:  749,  Accounts  for  Pocomoke  District.  In 
1705  Governor  Seymour  reported  to  the  Board  of  Trade  that  for 


463]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  21 

Most  of  the  natural  resources  and  forms  of  food  supply 
that  an  agricultural  colony  situated  near  the  sea  produced, 
or  could  be  made  to  produce,  were  evidently  abundant  in 
Maryland.  During  the  period  of  royal  government  these 
products  were  amply  sufficient  to  support  the  colony  in  ordi- 
nary circumstances,  and,  if  the  inhabitants  had  cared  to  do 
so,  they  could  undoubtedly  have  exported  any  of  them  in 
considerable  quantities  to  the  other  colonies  or  even  to  Eng- 
land, but  except  for  a  small  quantity  of  furs  they  were  not 
sent  out  of  the  province.  The  reason  for  this  indifference 
to  the  possible  commercial  importance  of  fish  and  other  food- 
stuffs is  sufficiently  well  known.  It  did  not  pay  the  colonists 
to  increase  the  amount  of  their  various  food  products  in 
order  to  export  them.  There  was,  however,  one  product 
which  they  raised  primarily  for  export, — tobacco.  They 
had  discovered  that  its  cultivation  was  easy  and  profitable, 
and  to  it  they  had  long  turned  their  attention.  From  the 
very  beginning  of  the  colony  the  tide-water  region  had  been 
devoted  almost  exclusively  to  tobacco  raising,  so  the  years 
from  1689  to  1715  do  not  present  any  new  phase  of  econo- 
mic development;  but,  because  the  records  of  the  royal 
period  are  more  complete,  they  furnish  a  good  point  from 
which  to  review  briefly  the  progress  of  the  trade  during  the 
earlier  days  and  to  describe  more  fully  the  situation  with  re- 
gard to  the  staple  at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

Before  the  settlement  of  Maryland  the  English  govern- 
ment had  already  adopted  a  definite  policy  of  regulation  and 
restriction  of  the  growth  of  plantation  tobacco,  and  this 
restriction  had  become  the  most  important  factor  in  the 
development  of  the  tobacco  trade.  For  ethical  reasons  sen- 
timent in  England  was  in  the  beginning  strongly  averse  to 
the  use  of  tobacco,  but  the  colonists  in  Virginia  had  dis- 

seven  years  past  Maryland  had  not  exported  one  barrel  of  beef  or 
pork,  but  had  been  forced  to  purchase  these  commodities  from  Caro- 
lina, Pennsylvania,  New  York,  and  other  colonies  (CO.  5:  715,  G. 
25,  1705  bundle).  A  Rhode  Island  record  of  about  this  period  says 
that  Virginia  and  Maryland  imported  into  Rhode  Island  pork,  wheat, 
and  English  goods  (C.  O.  5:  1264,  p.  90). 


22  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [464 

covered  its  value  as  an  export  and  had  consequently  devoted 
themselves  to  its  cultivation  regardless  of  moral  considera- 
tions." The  English  government  had  been  forced  to  recog- 
nize the  existence  of  the  industry  and  to  attempt  to  regulate 
it  temporarily,  although  the  authorities  still  hoped  that 
eventually  the  attention  of  the  colonists  could  be  diverted 
to  other  commodities.^"  Meantime  on  the  whole  the  Eng- 
lish regulation  of  the  industry  benefited  the  colonists  by  giv- 
ing greater  security  to  their  chief  export,  notwithstanding 
the  fact  that  certain  concessions  were  required  of  them  in 
return.  In  1620  the  Virginia  Company  agreed  to  pay  duties 
on  the  tobacco  they  imported  in  excess  of  those  to  which 
they  were  liable  by  their  charter,  and  the  king  prohibited  the 
growth  of  the  staple  in  England."  Later  regulations  bound 
the  Virginians  to  send  tlieir  tobacco  to  the  home  country 
alone,^^  but  the  government  conceded  that  Spanish  tobacco 
should  be  virtually  excluded  from  England.^*  The  procla- 
mation against  home-grown  tobacco  and  the  exclusion  of 
foreign  resulted  in  the  practical  monopoly  of  the  home 
market  by  colonial  tobacco  and  in  the  establishment  of  the 
trade  as  a  permanent  feature  in  the  life  of  the  Virginia 
colony.*^" 

55  G.  L.  Beer,  The  Origins  of  the  British  Colonial  System,  1578- 
1660,  ch.  iv.  As  late  as  1662  Governor  Berkeley  of  Virginia  de- 
plored the  use  of  tobacco  in  England.  "  The  vicious  ruinous  plant 
of  Tobacco  I  would  not  name,  but  that  it  brings  more  money  to  the 
Crown  then  all  the  Islands  in  America  besides"  (Egerton  MSS. 
2395,  f.  354,  British  Museum). 

^^  Berkeley  tried  hard  to  induce  the  Virginians  to  turn  their  atten- 
tion to  hemp  and  flax  but  without  success  (Egerton  AISS.  2395, 
f.  362.  British  Museum). 

5'^  T.  Rymer,  Foedera.  London,  1704-1735,  vol.  xvii,  pp.  233-235; 
Beer,  Origins,  pp.  112,  113. 

58  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Colonial  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  48- 

59  Beer,  Origins,  p.  132.  The  offer  of  the  company  to  ship  the 
product  to  England  in  return  for  a  monopoly  of  the  home  market 
was  accepted  by  the  government  (Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col. 
vol.  i,  p.  61).  As  a  result  of  this  agreement  the  king  in  1624  by 
proclamation  forbade  the  importation,  of  all  foreign  tobacco  (Rymer, 
vol.  xvii,  pp.  621-624),  a  policy  which  was  continued  by  Charles  I 
(ibid.,  vol.  xviii,  pp.  19,  72,  73;  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol. 
i,  p.  89). 

CO  For  a  full  discussion  of  the  regulation  of  the  tobacco  trade,  see 
Beer,  Origins,  chs.  v-vii. 


465]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  23 

Therefore,  although  tobacco  in  Virginia  had  fallen  in 
value  from  three  shillings  a  pound,  the  price  fixed  in  1619, 
to  less  than  two  pence  in  1630,"  and  after  that  time  fluctu- 
ated around  six  pence,  it  had  still  proved  itself,  because  of 
its  sure  market  in  England,  the  only  crop  that  could  be  grown 
with  profit.  So  the  Maryland  colonists  too,  when  they  dis- 
covered that  their  extremely  fertile  soil  was  almost  as 
favorable  for  the  growth  of  the  plant  as  that  of  \'irginia, 
turned  exclusively  to  the  production  of  tobacco.  Before 
1640  it  had  become  the  staple  of  the  country.  From  about 
1640,  also,  owing  to  the  scarcity  of  coin  as  a  medium  of  ex- 
change in  both  Virginia  and  Maryland,  tobacco  came  to  be 
used  for  this  purpose.^^ 

As  in  Virginia,*^^  so  in  Maryland  the  entire  dependence  of 
the  colony  on  tobacco  soon  led  to  efforts  to  regulate  both 
the  quality  and  the  quantity  of  the  product.  The  inexperi- 
ence of  the  planters,  rather  than  any  neglect  on  their  part, 
had  led  to  the  production  of  a  very  inferior  grade,^*  but  they 
were  forced  by  poverty  to  attempt  to  market  the  bad  leaves 
as  w^ell  as  the  good.  To  prevent  this  deterioration  and  to 
maintain  the  reputation  of  their  tobacco,  the  Maryland  As- 
sembly during  the  seventeenth  century  passed  various  laws 
looking  toward  improvement  of  the  quality  ;''^  but  the  con- 

61  Beer,  Origins,  pp.  92-94. 

62  J.  L.  Bozman,  History  of  Maryland,  vol.  ii,  p.  178-  See  also 
M.  Jacobstein,  "  Tobacco  Industry  in  the  United  States,"  in  Columbia 
University  Studies,  vol.  xxvi,  no.  3,  ch.  i,  p.  25. 

63  Virginia  passed  a  number  of  early  laws  attempting  to  regulate 
the  quality  and  quantity  of  her  tobacco.  An  inspection  act  of  1630 
(W.  W.  Hening.  The  Statutes  at  Large,  vol.  i,  p.  152)  was  followed 
by  a  series  of  similar  measures,  and  several  statutes  were  also  passed 
limiting  the  quantity  of  tobacco  each  inhabitant  could  raise  (ibid., 
vol.  i,  pp.  141,  142,  164,  165,  188-190,  203,  224,  225). 

6-i  P.  A.  Bruce,  Economic  History  of  Virginia  in  the  Seventefnth 
Century,  vol.  i,  pp.  302,  303. 

65  In  1640  the  Assembly  passed  a  law  decreeing  that  all  tobacco 
intended  for  exportation  should  be  examined  by  a  sworn  viewer, 
who  would  condemn  the  bad  and  seal  the  good  (Archives,  vol.  i, 
PP-  97-99)-  In  1657  the  packing  of  ground  leaves  or  second  crops 
was  prohibited.  This  law  was  later  renewed,  indicating  the  con- 
tinued necessity  for  it  (ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  372,  537)-  A  later  law  (1676) 
declared  that  every  planter  should  have  a  storehouse  for  his  tobacco 
on  his  own  plantation,  so  that  his  crop  might  be  safely  preserved 
(ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  519)- 


24  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [466 

tinned  complaint  against  the  Maryland  product  indicates  that 
the  laws  were  not  so  successfully  enforced  there  as  in  Vir- 
ginia, and  that  the  Maryland  crop  was  always  regarded 
as  slightly  inferior  in  quality.  In  the  second  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century  the  evils  of  overproduction  were  most 
seriously  felt,  and  attempts  were  made  to  regulate  the  quan- 
tity as  well  as  the  quality.  By  1662  the  constantly  fluctu- 
ating price  had  fallen  very  low,  and  the  Privy  Council,  in 
response  to  an  appeal  from  Virginia,*'''  was  induced  to  advise 
Virginia  and  jMaryland  to  join  in  attempting  to  restrict  pro- 
duction, in  order  to  relieve  the  congested  state  of  the  English 
markets. 

Several  suggestions  were  made,  therefore,  by  the  colonies 
for  the  restriction  of  planting.*''  Unfortunately,  in  Mary- 
land the  question  became  a  party  issue  between  the  large 
landowners  of  the  Upper  House,  who  could  afford  to  cease 
planting  for  a  year,  and  the  small  farmers,  represented  in 
the  Lower  House,  whose  whole  livelihood  was  dependent  on 
their  annual  crop,  however  low  the  price  for  it  might  be. 
When  finally  after  heated  discussion  the  Houses  were  in- 
duced to  limit  the  quantity.  Lord  Baltimore,  moved  by  the 
consideration  of  his  revenue  in  tobacco,  refused  his  approval. 
So  all  the  attempts  made  between  1660  and  1685  to  raise  the 
price  of  tobacco  by  regulating  the  quantity  proved  ineffective, 
and  in  1689  there  was  absolutely  no  law  in  the  colony  limit- 
ing the  amount  which  any  colonist  could  raise. 

When  the  royal  governors  came  to  Maryland,  therefore, 
tobacco  was  almost  the  only  staple  commodity, — "  our  meat, 
drinke  Cloathing  and  monies,"  as  one  of  the  inhabitants  wrote 
home  in  1698.*'^  Another  writes  in  1705:  "The  Cheifest 
Comodity  which  is  so  much  Looked  affter  is  Tobacco  which 
imploys  all  hands  in  every  Family  for  with  that  they  by  there 
slaves  and  white  servants  as  also  theire  Cloaths  and  all  there 


66  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1661-1668,  301,  308,  312,  358,  368. 

67  Archives,  vol.  iii,  pp.  480,  503-S12,  547,  550,  558-562;  vol.  v  pp. 
5_9^  15-20.  For  a  later  attempt  to  restrict  overproduction  see  Cal. 
St.  P.  Col.  1681-168S,  3,  448. 

68  Royal  Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 


467]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  2$ 

liquors  as  Wine,  Brandy,  Rum  stout  English  Beere,  etc.; 
and  also  Cattle  horses  sheep  and  they  likewise  buy  there 
Land  with  itt  there  is  more  Paines  taken  to  raise  itt  then 
any  one  thing  in  the  world  again. ""^ 

By  the  end  of  the  century  the  average  quantity  of  tobacco 
grown  annually  by  each  colonist  had  fallen  from  about  four 
thousand  to  two  thousand  pounds,'^"  but  because  of  the  in- 
crease of  population  the  total  amount  produced  was  much 
larger  than  in  the  early  days  of  the  province.  The  chief 
varieties  were  the  sweet-scented  and  the  Orinoco.  The  lat- 
ter, which  had  a  lighter  and  more  chaffy  leaf,^^  was  the 
kind  produced  in  the  greatest  quantities  in  Maryland,^^ 
whereas  Virginia  was  famous  for  its  sweet-scented  tobacco. 
Although  Francis  Nicholson  in  a  letter  to  the  Treasury  in 
1697  expressed  the  opinion  that  the  very  bright  Orinoco 
from  Maryland  would  have  a  good  sale  in  Holland,"  Ori- 
noco was  in  general  regarded  as  inferior  to  the  sweet-scented 
tobacco,  and  the  Maryland  product  was  never  considered 
equal  to  that  of  Virginia.^*  Moreover,  there  was  still  in 
both  colonies  a  constant  tendency  to  lower  the  grades  pro- 
duced, due  now  not  to  the  inexperience  of  the  early  part  of 
the  century,  but  to  the  demand  of  the  outports  in  England 
for  the  poorer  grades  of  the  plant,^^  and  also  to  the  possi- 
bility of  passing  the  poorer  qualities  into  England  customs 
free,  as  damaged  by  the  voyage.^''     The  packing  of  stalks^^ 

69  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

■^0  Sloane  MSS.  2902,  f.  290,  British  Museum. 

71  C.  O.  5 :  727,  p.  245- 

"  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I.  59,  I.  75. 

''^  Treasury  Papers,  xlvi,  39. 

7-*  This  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  in  Virginia,  when  prices  were 
low,  it  was  the  planting  of  Orinoco  tobacco  as  the  less  profitable 
variety  that  was  first  stopped  (C.  O.  5'  I3i5.  N.  8). 

75  Answer  of  the  Commissioners  for  Trade  and  Plantations  to  an 
order  of  the  Rt.  Honble.  the  House  of  Lords  of  the  ist  of  June, 
1714,  relating  to  the  Tobacco  Trade,  in  House  of  Lords  MSS.,  June 
5,  1714;  C.  O.  5:  1317,  P.  26. 

76C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  153,  O.  154-  ,,      ,      , 

77  Abraham  Hill,  who  collected  notes  on  Maryland  among  his 
"Papers  concerning  Trade,  Taxes,  etc.,"  in  the  Sloane  MSS.  in  the 
British  Museum,  said  that  the  unwholesome  stalks  of  tobacco 
weighed  one  fifth  part  of  the  whole  (Sloane  MSS.  2902,  f.  290, 
British  Museum). 


26  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [468 

with  the  leaves  tended  further  to  lower  the  quality  of  the 
tobacco  exported;  but  as  this  practice  raised  the  amount 
sent  over  and  consequently  the  customs,  it  was  rather  en- 
couraged than  otherwise  by  the  authorities.'^^  Some  men 
concerned  in  the  trade  seem  to  have  condoned  the  shipment 
of  stalks  to  England  because  they  could  be  sold  dishonestly 
for  good  tobacco/^  In  spite  of  these  influences  tending  to 
lower  the  quality  of  exported  tobacco,  the  regulations  cited 
below  indicate  that  the  colonial  authorities  in  Maryland  under 
the  royal  government  made  a  somewhat  greater  effort  to 
prevent  deterioration  in  her  staple  commodity  than  they  had 
done  in  the  days  of  the  proprietor.  Laws  were  passed  pro- 
viding that  storehouses  should  be  erected  in  different  places 
to  maintain  the  quality  of  the  leaf  by  protecting  it  from  ex- 
posure to  the  weather.®"  In  1704  it  was  made  a  felony  to 
alter  the  marks  on  hogsheads  after  they  had  been  packed 
and  graded,®^  and  a  law  was  also  passed  against  false  pack- 
ing of  tobacco.®-  Nevertheless,  the  interested  endeavors  of 
the  planters  to  export  a  low  grade  of  leaf  could  not  easily  be 
controlled,  and  Maryland  did  not  attempt  to  go  as  far  as  Vir- 
ginia in  the  passage  of  laws  regulating  quality.®^  Maryland 
tobacco,  therefore,  continued  inferior  to  that  of  the  southern 
colony.  The  efforts  perhaps  prevented  further  deteriora- 
tion in  the  quality,  but  they  were  not  successful  enough  to 
make  any  perceptible  improvement. 

78  C.  O.  5 :  1308,  6. 

'''9  Harleian  AISS.  1238,  ff.  20-28,  British  Museum.  This  document 
asserts  that  stalks  were  often  sold  in  England  for  good  tobacco. 
"  The  next  degree  of  Cheats  are  such  as  sell  cutt  Stalkes  for  best 
Virginia  by  putting  a  little  best  Virginia  att  one  end  of  a  pound 
of  cutt  Stalks  and  when  people  tasts  it  finds  it  to  [be]  best  Virginia 
not  perceiving  the  cheate  gives  them  i8d.  or  2s.  a  pound  for  these 
Stalkes  Others  that  have  sold  three  quarters  of  a  pound  of  cutt 
Stalkes  and  one  quarter  of  Birchen  leaves  for  xiid.  or  xvid.  a  pound." 

*°  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  469;  vol.  xxii,  p.  516;  C.  O.  5:  748,  A 
Journal  of  the  Councell  In  Assembly  April  27th,  171S,  p.  96. 

81  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  231. 

82  Ibid.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  328. 

83  In  1713  a  law  designed  to  regulate  the  quality  of  tobacco  was 
passed  by  the  Virginia  Assembly  (Hening,  vol.  iv,  p.  2i7-  Text  not 
given.     See  also  C.  O.  5:  1317,  p.  26). 


469]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  2/ 

Maryland  tobacco  was  a  staple  that  had  constant  sale  in 
England,  but  most  of  the  evidence  seems  to  indicate  that  in 
spite  of  this  fact  the  inhabitants  of  the  colony  considered 
themselves  far  from  prosperous.  In  1685  Mrs.  Taney  of 
Charles  County  complained  to  the  king  that  the  people  in  her 
section  of  Maryland  were  so  very  poor  that  they  were  not 
even  able  to  support  a  minister.^*  The  Council  of  Maryland, 
in  answer  to  certain  queries  of  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1697, 
stated  that  the  poverty  of  the  province  was  such  that  it  alone 
would  discourage  any  hostile  attacks  upon  them.®^  Governor 
Nicholson  suggested  in  1695  and  again  in  1697  that  this  gen- 
eral condition  of  poverty  and  discouragement  came  from  the 
action  of  the  English  merchants  in  spreading  false  reports 
as  to  the  extremely  low  state  of  the  tobacco  trade,  so  that 
the  people  might  not  plant  too  much  to  be  easily  sold  f*^  and 
Governor  Seymour  in  1707  supported  this  contention.^^  At 
the  same  time  Seymour  wrote  a  propos  of  some  colonial  dis- 
turbance, "  Our  poverty  increases  to  fresh  villanies  ;"^^  and 
several  years  later  the  president  of  the  Council  told  the 
Board  of  Trade  that  many  of  the  inhabitants  were  reduced 
to  great  poverty  and  others  were  in  debt.^^  The  Assembly 
of  1 7 14  still  thought  the  province  very  poor,  though,  as  we 
shall  see,  conditions  were  actually  somewhat  better  than  at 
the  beginning  of  the  century.  In  answer  to  Governor  Hart's 
address  the  Assembly  said :  "  Tis  great  Satisfacon  to  us  that 
your  Exc^  is  an  Eye  Witness  to  ye  lowness  of  yt  Ebb  which 
this  poor  province  in  its  Circumstances  is  reduced  to,  and 
that  you  are  pleased  to  take  such  particular  notice  of  it — our 
deplorable  Condiccon  being  knowne  wee  hope  ye  speedier 
Relief e  from  that  Majesty  that  never  yet  denyed  her  royal 
Aid  to  any  of  her  suffering  Subjects  that  implor'd  it,  her 

84  Tanner  MSS.  xxxi,  137,  Bodleian  Library. 

85  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  543. 

86  C.  O.  5:  724,  p.  197;  C.  O.  s:  714,  25  (iii). 

87  Seymour  also  said  that  the  merchants  would  not  send  supplies 
to  the  colony,  and  that  ships  sailed  from  England  with  provision  for 
the  voyage  only  (C.  O.  5:  7i6,  H.  41). 

88  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  41. 

89  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I.  62,  I.  46. 


28  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [47© 

Majty's  prevailing  endeavours  in  ye  promoting  of  that  peace 
that  has  removed  soe  many  burthens  from  our  trade  Justly 
claims  ye  most  hearty  and  sincere  acknowledgmt  that  can 
be  made  from  dutifull  and  loyall  Subjects  to  ye  best  of 
princes ;  but  yet  Wee  fear  soe  farr  have  Wee  been  influ- 
enced by  ye  Warr  that  without  our  Soveraigns  more  particu- 
lar Grace  and  favour  extended  to  us  Wee  shall  not  be  able 
by  any  endeavours  of  our  owne  to  recover  our  lost  Circum- 
stances, nor  prevent  ye  totall  Ruin  of  our  Tob"  trade  being 
our  onely  Staple."'"'  The  statement  of  the  Reverend  Hugh 
Jones  is  the  only  one  that  contradicts  these  assertions.  To- 
bacco, according  to  him,  was  a  "  Comodity  so  vendable  espe- 
cially in  these  Last  Seven  years  past  that  thousands  have  gott 
good  estates  by  itt  Most  of  our  planters  when  they  began 
this  sort  of  husbandry  have  not  where  w^'^all  to  Cloath  them- 
selves whereof  Severall  now  are  w^orth  thousands  of  pounds. 
Indeed  this  Country  hath  been  cheifly  Seated  by  poor  people 
whose  Industry  hath  raised  them  to  great  Estates."'*^  Al- 
though the  governors  and  the  colonists  may  have  somewhat 
exaggerated  the  condition  of  afifairs,  surely  their  evidence  is 
on  the  whole  of  greater  value  than  that  of  the  comparative 
newxomer  to  the  province.  The  poverty  of  many  of  the 
planters  seems  unquestionable. 

One  reason  why  the  people  were  not  prosperous  was  that 
they  were  dependent  on  tobacco  as  almost  their  only  form 
of  currency.  It  was  clumsy  as  a  medium  of  exchange,  and 
its  fluctuations  in  price  led  to  great  uncertainty  in  trade.  It 
is  true  that  there  was  more  money  in  the  province  between 
1689  and  1715  than  in  its  earlier  days,  but  the  amount  was 
never  so  great  as  materially  to  alter  the  use  of  tobacco  as 
legal  currency.  Jones  says :  "  Not  but  that  we  have  money 
both  Spanish  and  English  pretty  plenty  which  serves  only  for 
pockett  Expenses  and  not  for  trade  tobacco  being  the  Stand- 
ard for  trade  not  only  with  the  Merchants  but  alsoe  among 

^°  C.  O.  5 :  746,  pp.  8,  9,  Journall  of  the  house  of  Delegates  from 
22d,  June  1714  to  3d  July  1714. 

^1  Royal  Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 


47  I  ]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS    AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  29 

our  Selves. "°-  In  1700  it  was  suggested  that  there  was 
enough  money  in  the  province  to  admit  the  collection  of  the 
public  levy  for  the  year  in  coin  instead  of  in  tobacco."^  The 
statement  was  made  at  this  time  that  the  levy  had  been  so 
paid  before,  though  evidently  without  legal  warrant.***  The 
Assembly  argued  that  coin  would  make  a  more  elastic  cur- 
rency and  that  its  use  would  give  an  impetus  to  trade.  Ac- 
cording to  the  Assembly,  also,  the  planters  had  not  imported 
coin  from  England  because  they  had  had  no  use  for  it.  Should 
the  levy  be  paid  in  money,  they  would  be  forced  to  import 
it,  and  more  would  soon  be  in  circulation  in  the  province.^^ 
The  proposition  was  rejected  that  year  without  comment,®*' 
because  of  Governor  Blakiston's  opposition.^'  At  the  next 
session  the  question  was  again  raised,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
the  Board  of  Trade  had  advised  Blakiston  not  to  make 
innovations  in  the  payment  of  taxes.**®  The  Lower  House 
of  Assembly  adopted  a  committee  report  providing  that  the 
sheriffs  should  be  obliged  to  receive  all  public  dues  either  in 
money  or  in  tobacco  at  the  election  of  the  payer,  on  the 
ground  that,  while  it  was  desirable  to  have  those  pay  money 
who  could,  it  would  be  impossible  for  the  poor  inhabitants 
to  procure  enough  coin  to  meet  the  levy.****  Even  after  this 
date,  however,  it  happened  only  once,  in  1709,  that  there  was 
a  sufficient  supply  of  money  in  the  treasury  for  the  annual 
disbursements  to  be  made  in  coin.^**'^  The  desire  to  keep  all 
the  coin  possible  in  the  colony  was  shown  in  the  anxiety  to 

92  Royal  Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 
9^  Archives,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  48. 
9*C.  O.  5:  715,  8  (viii). 

95  C.  O.  5:  715,8  (viii). 

96  Archives,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  52. 

9^  C.  O.  5 :  715,  8,  39.  Blakiston  forwarded  the  petition  of  the 
Assembly  without  endorsement. 

98  C.  O.  5  ■■  726,  p.  107. 

99  Archives,  vol.  xxiv,  pp.  171-173.  The  report  of  the  committee 
to  the  Lower  House,  though  accepted  by  it,  was  apparently  not 
referred  to  the  Upper  House,  nor  was  it  embodied  in  the  laws  of 
the  province.  As  a  mere  report  it  could  not  have  been  actually  put 
into  force. 

lo'i  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  453.  463 ;  C.  O.  5 :  747,  Journal  of  the 
Committee  of  Accounts  for  1709.  All  the  disbursements  in  the 
account  are  reckoned  in  money,  not  tobacco. 


30  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [4/2 

raise  the  value  of  Spanish  money  to  the  rate  at  which  it  was 
current  in  the  proprietary  colony  of  Pennsylvania,  lest  the 
greater  cheapness  of  money  in  Maryland  should  drain  the 
province  of  its  Spanish  coin.^*^^  This  proposal  was  frowned 
on  by  the  Board  of  Trade,"-  and  eventually  the  rates  of 
foreign  coins  in  all  the  colonies  were  settled  by  the  English 
government."^  Later  the  queen  was  asked  to  send  over  a 
quantity  of  copper  coin  to  pass  current  in  Maryland  alone 
for  sums  less  than  £5  and  to  be  of  the  value  at  which  it  was 
designed  to  pass,  in  order  that  petty  payments  might  be  made 
more  easily."*  The  Board  of  Trade  apparently  approved 
this  plan,  but  there  is  no  record  of  the  receipt  of  any  coin."^ 
None  of  these  efforts  brought  about  the  substitution  of  coin 
for  tobacco  as  a  medium  of  exchange. 

Such  are  the  general  facts  with  regard  to  tobacco  in  Mary- 
land during  the  years  between  1689  and  1715.  Fortunately 
it  has  also  been  possible  to  ascertain  with  a  fair  approach  to 
accuracy,  if  not  the  actual  amount  of  this  all-important 
staple  raised  in  Maryland,  at  least  how  much  was  exported 
annually  to  England  and  to  the  other  colonies ;  w'hat  w-as  its 
price  in  the  colony  and  in  the  home  country  ;  and  the  amount 
of  revenue  which  this  chief  export  trade  of  the  colony  paid 
to  the  imperial  and  to  the  colonial  government.  The  extent 
and  importance  of  the  tobacco  industry  in  Maryland  can  be 
much  more  fittingly  appreciated  when  these  facts  are  known. 

By  the  Navigation  Act  of  1660  tobacco  grown  in  the  Eng- 
lish colonies  could  be  exported  only  to  England  or  to  the 
English  plantations.  The  trade  was  therefore  to  be  confined 
to  those  places,  and  the  amount  sent  to  England  and  to  the 
colonies  included  all  that  could  legitimately  be  exported  from 
the  province  of  Maryland.  As  the  home  consumption 
could  not  have  been  large,  the  exportation  represents  approxi- 

101  c.  0.5: 715,39- 

102  C.  O.  5 :  726,  p.  106. 

i^s  In  accordance  with  the  regulations  made  by  the  queen's  procla- 
mation of  June  18,  1704,  and  the  subsequent  Act  of  Parliament  in 
1707,  the  Maryland  Assembly  finally  adopted  rates  of  foreign  coins 
(Archives;  vol.  xxvii,  p.  350). 

104  Ibid.,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  530,  April  8,  1706;  C.  O.  5 :  7i6,  H.  20,  22. 

1°^  C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  430;  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  439. 


473]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  3  I 

mately  the  whole  amount  grown  in  the  colony.^'"^  The  an- 
nual export  of  tobacco  to  England  from  1689  to  171 5  was 
as  follows : — ^"'^ 

Year  Amount 

1689  3,085      hhds.108 

1690  20,077         "     ^°° 

106  The  amount  of  tobacco  illegally  exported  from  Maryland  is 
discussed  in  Chapter  III  of  this  monograph.  This  amount,  so  far 
as  I  have  been  able  to  discover,  was  not  large.  But  since,  except 
for  the  general  fact  that  it  was  small,  it  has  been  impossible  to 
make  an  exact  estimate  of  the  amount,  it  will  have  to  be  left  out 
of  this  consideration  along  with  that  used  in  home  consumption. 
Neither  of  these  amounts  would  appreciably  alter  the  results  reached 
below. 

107  These  estimates  are  taken  partly  from  the  list  given  in  the 
Maryland  Archives  (vol.  viii,  p.  236),  and  partly  from  the  Naval 
Office  Lists  for  Maryland  from  1689-1701  (C.  O.  5:  749)-  The  lists 
do  not  extend  beyond  1701,  and  from  that  period  the  Custom  House 
Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  1698-1714,  and  the  In- 
spector General's  Account  for  1697  must  be  used.  A  considerable 
amount  of  uncertainty  must  be  admitted  in  these  two  sets  of 
accounts,  as  the  lists  are  sometimes  missing  for  parts  of  certain 
years  in  the  first  set  of  figures,  and  the  second  set  deals  with  Vir- 
ginia and  Maryland  together  and  takes  into  account  only  the  tobacco 
exported  to  England.  The  Naval  Office  Lists  cited  were  added 
from  Lady  Day  (March  25)  to  Lady  Day  as  the  accounts  were 
originally  arranged  in  that  way,  while  the  Custom  House  Accounts 
run  from  Christmas  to  Christmas.  But  as  practically  the  whole 
export  of  tobacco  was  made  in  vessels  sailing  from  the  colonies  in 
the  summer  months,  the  two  winter  months  of  January  and  Feb- 
ruary make  very  little  difference  in  the  estimates.  This  is,  however, 
another  reason  why  the  results  of  these  computations  must  be  taken 
in  a  general  way  and  not  as  specifically  accurate.  It  must  be  noted, 
finally,  that  the  crop  which  was  exported  was  always  the  one  grown 
the  previous  year  and  kept  in  the  colony  during  the  winter.  This 
fact  will  sometimes  explain  discrepancies  between  the  annual  export 
recorded  and  the  official  statements  sent  home  the  same  year  telling 
the  size  of  the  crop  then  in  the  ground. 

10s  In  detail  the  amount  is  as  follows : — 

1689.  From  Patuxent  2678  hhds.  (Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  236) 
"  Pocomoke  407  "  (C.  O.  5:  749) 
Total  3085  " 
The  records  for  1689  do  not  give  the  exports  of  Potomac,  the  third 
district  in  Maryland,  and  in  other  respects  are  evidently  very  incom- 
plete. They  do  not  include  the  tobacco  exported  by  the  London 
fleet  of  that  year,  which  may  have  carried  away  a  large  part  of  the 
crop  of  1688  before  the  list  of  exports  begins. 

109  1690.     From  Patuxent  19,330  hhds.  (Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  236) 
Pocomoke     747      "      (0.0.5:749) 
Total     20,077 
1691.     From  Patuxent   5109     hhds.  (Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  236) 
"      Pocomoke  964^       "     (CO.  5:749) 
Total      6073^       " 


32  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [474 

1691  6,073^    hhds. 


1692  31J03 

1693  24,250 

1694  i5,58o>^ 
169s  25,862 

1696  17.267 

1697  Z^,},79 

1698  27,623 


110 


The  great  falling  ofif  in  the  accounts  for  1691  may  have  been  due  to 
the  disturbance  and  unrest  caused  by  the  government  of  the  Asso- 
ciators  in  Maryland  during  the  revolution.  Clearly  the  first  up- 
heaval in  1689  did  not  perceptibly  affect  the  crop  exported  in  1690. 
The  decrease  may  have  been  caused  by  delay  in  shipment  during 
the  autumn  of  1691.  John  Twitt,  a  skipper  trading  in  Maryland  and 
Delaw^are,  wrote  in  December,  1691 :  "  It  is  generally  reported  in 
Maryland  that  half  the  crops  of  corn  and  tobacco  failed,  and  that 
of  fifty  or  sixty  ships  only  two  or  three  will  be  ready  to  sail  in  less 
than  three  months'  time"  (Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  1951).  This 
statement  could  not  refer  to  the  crop  harvested  in  1691.  which  must 
have  been  unusually  large.  Possibly  the  figures  for  Patuxent  are 
incomplete. 

110  i5g2.     From  Patuxent  2"],^]!  hhds. 

"       Potomac     3,306      " 

"       Pocomoke  1,020      " 

Total     31,703      "      (C.  O.  5:  749). 
These  figures  may  include  some  of  the  crop  of  1690,  which  was  held 
over  for  shipment  until  1692,  when  an  imusually  large  fleet  was  in 
the  colony. 

1693.  From  Patuxent  20,003  hhds. 

"       Potomac     2,795       " 
"       Pocomoke  1,452       " 

Total     24,250      "      (CO.  5:749) 

1694.  From  Patuxent  12,355       " 

"       Potomac     2,205       " 
"       Pocomoke  1,020^  " 

Total      15,580^4  "      (C.  O.  5:  749) 

1695.  From  Patuxent  21,619      " 

"       Potomac     3,334      " 
"       Pocomoke     909      " 

Total     25,862      "      (C.  O.  S:  749) 

1696.  From  Patuxent    6,571       " 

"  Annapolis  4,092  " 

"  Cecil  Co.       616  " 

"  Wm  Stadt  1,951  " 

"  Potomac     3,767 

"  Pocomoke     272  " 

Total      17,269      "      (C.  O.  5:  749) 
In  1696  Annapolis,  Cecil  County,  and  Williamstadt  were  given  deputy 
naval  oificers,  and  consequently  separate  lists  for  those  districts  were 
sent  to  England. 

"1  The  records  of  the  years  from  1696  to  1698  are  good  examples 
of  the  unreliability  of  the  reports  sent  home  in  letters  by  the  gover- 
nors and  by  private  persons  as  to  the  size  of  the  crops  each  season. 


475]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  33 

1699  28,825  hhds. 

1700  21,903 

1701  25,686  "  "- 

1702  33>625  II 

1703  17,797  " 

1704  31.718 

1706  17,731 

1707  25,331 

1708  27,925 

1696  was  reported  as  a  bad  year  for  tobacco  (C.  O.  5:  719,  Bundle 
4,  no.  12,  June  12,  1696),  while  1697,  on  the  other  hand,  was  sup- 
posed to  have  been  unusually  good  (C.  O.  5:  714,  25,  36).  But  the 
shipment  of  the  crop  of  1696  in  the  following  year  was,  as  may  be 
seen,  very  large, — larger,  in  fact,  than  the  amount  which  w^ent  home 
in  1698,  although  that  too  was  a  fairly  good  crop.  This  discrepancy 
in  the  figures  was  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  sometimes  the  fleets 
which  went  to  the  colony  were  not  large  enough  to  carry  away  the 
whole  of  one  year's  crop,  which  had,  therefore,  to  wait  over  for  the 
next  season.  The  size  of  the  fleet  must  have  had  something  to  do 
with  the  unusual  shipment  of  1697,  in  which  year  there  were  seventy- 
nine  vessels  in  Maryland  as  against  sixty  the  year  before  (C.  O.  5: 
749).  In  this  case  the  difference  is  undoubtedly  due  also  to  care- 
lessness in  the  rough  estimate  of  the  size  of  the  crops.  Robert 
Quary,  for  instance,  in  1706  wrote  home  that  nearly  three  hundred 
ships  were  going  back  from  Virginia  and  Maryland  laden  with  to- 
bacco (C.  O.  5 :  1315,  N,  63).  This  was  an  extremely  large  fleet,  but 
the  official  figures  show  that  the  amount  of  tobacco  imported  in  1706 
was  rather  less  than  usual.  It  has,  therefore,  been  necessary  to  dis- 
count all  unofficial  statements  about  the  tobacco  export  and  to  rely 
exclusively  on  the  Naval  Office  and  Custom  House  figures. 

112  From  1697  to  1701  the  records  of  the  amount  of  tobacco  ex- 
ported from  Virginia  and  Maryland  may  be  found  also  in  the  Custom 
House  Accounts.  The  figures  are  for  both  colonies  together,  but  a 
comparison  of  them  with  the  Naval  Office  Lists,  relating  to  Mary- 
land alone,  will  show  the  average  proportion  of  the  whole  export 
which  came  from  Maryland.  As  the  Naval  Office  Lists  for  the 
years  1700  and  1701  are  manifestly  incomplete,  Potomac  being  ex- 
cluded, it  has  been  thought  more  accurate  to  consider  only  the  years 
1697,  1698,  and  1699  in  computing  the  percentage  of  all  the  tobacco 
that  came  from  Maryland  alone. 

The  complete  lists  of  figures  for  the  five  years  from  both  sources 
are  as  follows  : — 

1697.     From  Patuxent  21,022  hhds. 

"      Annapolis        25 

"      Wm  Stadt  3,652 

"       Cecil  Co.       907 

"      Potomac     6,122 

"      Pocomoke     651 

Total      32,379      "      (CO.  5:  749) 
From   Virginia   and   Maryland   35,328,637   pounds    (Custom   House 
Accounts,  Inspector  General's  Accounts,  vol.  i). 
From  Maryland  32,379  hhds.  or  12,951,600  lbs. 

This  calculation  allows  400  pounds  to  the  hogshead,  which  seems 


34  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [4/6 

1709  31,537   hhds. 

1710  21,365 

1711  25,711 

1713  19,739 

1714  26,762    "  1^3 

to  have  been  customary    (Archives,   vol.  xxii,  p.  481).     Maryland, 
therefore,  exported  36.6  per  cent  of  the  total  export  for  the  year. 

1698.  From  Patuxent     14,423  hhds. 

"  Annapolis  6,721  " 
"  Wm  Stadt  2,333  " 
"      Potomac       4,146      " 

Total        27,623      "      (C.O.s:  749) 
From  Virginia  and  Maryland  31,096,571   lbs.    (Custom  House  Ac- 
counts, Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  vol.  i). 
From    Maryland   27,623    hhds.    or    11,049,200   lbs.     Percentage   35.5 
per  cent. 

1699.  From  Patuxent     16,729  hhds. 

"  Annapolis  6,575^  " 

"  Wm  Stadt  1,094      " 

"  Potomac  3,137      " 

"  Pocomoke  1,289^^  " 

Total        28,825      "      (CO.  5:  749) 
From  Virginia  and  Maryland  30,640,914  lbs.    (Custom  House  Ac- 
counts, vol.  ii). 

From    Maryland   28,825   hhds.    or    11,530,000   lbs.     Percentage    37.9 
per  cent. 

1700.  From  Patuxent     12,391  hhds. 

"      Annapolis     7,828      " 

"      Pocomoke     1,684      " 

Total        21,903      "      (CO.  5:  749) 
From  Virginia  and  Maryland  37,i66,454  lbs.    (Custom  House  Ac- 
counts, vol.  iii). 
From  Maryland  21,903  hhds.  or  8,761,200  lbs.      Percentage  23  per  cent. 

1701.  From  Patuxent     13,367  hhds. 

"      Annapolis   10,751       " 

"      Pocomoke    1,568      "     and    28,240    boxes    (C 

O.  5:  749-  It  is  im- 
possible to  tell  how 
many  hogsheads  this 

would  make). 

Total        25^      " 
From  Virginia  and  Maryland  31,754,126  lbs.    (Custom  House  Ac- 
counts, vol.  iv). 

From  Maryland  25,686  hhds.  or  10,274,400  lbs.     Percentage  32  per 
cent. 

Using  only  the  first  three  years  in  computing  the  average  propor- 
tion of  tobacco  which  was  exported  from  Maryland  alone,  it  is  found 
to  be  about  36.6  per  cent  of  the  total  for  the  two  colonies.  It  is 
upon  the  basis  of  this  percentage  that  the  figures  for  the  years  from 
1702-1714  are  reckoned. 

^13  The  complete  records  from  1702-1714  are  as  follows,  all  the 
figures  for  the  two  colonies  being  taken  from  the  Custom  House 


477]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  35 

Excluding  from  these  estimates  as  manifestly  imperfect 
the  records  for  the  years  1689  and  1691,  it  is  seen  that  the 
average  annual  export  of  tobacco  from  Maryland  during  the 
years  when  the  royal  governors  were  in  the  colony  was 
about  25,000  hogsheads  or  10,000,000  pounds.^^* 

Moreover,  when  the  complete  list  is  inspected  it  becomes 
evident  that  the  amount  of  tobacco  produced  for  exportation 
did  not  increase  either  in  Maryland  or  in  Virginia  between 
1689  and  1715.  The  low  price  received  for  the  staple  in 
England  at  the  end  of  the  century  may  account  for  this  fact. 
At  any  rate,  some  of  the  in-habitants  were  so  discouraged 

Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  and  the  Maryland  pro- 
portion of  the  crop  being  reckoned  as  36  per  cent. 

Exportation  from  Virginia  Estimated  Exportation 

and  Maryland  from  Maryland 

Year  In  Pounds  In  Pounds  In  Hogsheads 

1702  36,749,192  13,450,204  33,625 

1703  19,451,094  7,119,100  17,797 

1704  34,664,639  12,687,257  31,718 

1705  

1706  19,378,550  7,092,549  17,731 

1707  27,684,398  10,132,489  25,331 

1708  28,716,339  11,170.180  27,925 

1709  34,467,005  12,614,923  31,537 

1710  23,350,735  8,546,369  21,365 

1711  28,100,265  10,284,696  25,711 

1712  

1713  21,573,1X1  7,895,758  19,739 

1714  29,248,366  10.704.901  26,762 

ii*  Since  the  foregoing  account  was  compiled  I  have  found  in  the 
Colonial  Office  Papers  another  record  of  the  amount  of  tobacco 
exported  from  Maryland  between  1689  and  1701.  The  figures  are 
not  given  for  each  year  separately,  and  the  total  is  much  less  than 
that  made  by  the  addition  of  the  Naval  Office  Lists  of  ships'  ladings. 
The  account  must  therefore  be  incomplete,  but  it  seems  worth  while 
to  insert  it  here  for  comparison  both  with  the  amount  of  tobacco 
sent  to  England  and  with  that  exported  to  the  other  colonies  as 
given  on  page  36. 

Account  of  Tobacco  exported  from  Maryland 


To  England 

To  Plantations 

Period 

Hhds. 

Boxes 

Lbs. 

Hhds. 

Lbs. 

1690-February,   169I/2 

1,661 

199 

300 

1692-one  half  1693 

1,663 

469^^ 

1693-1694 

16,903 

497^ 

5,000 

I 694-1 696 

33,427 

709 

21,200 

1696-I698 

34,736 

134 

23,925 

I 698- I 700 

39.343 

98,729 

42 

1,525 

1700-one  half  1701 

28,251 

28,240 

7,450 

53y2 

5,400 

C.  0.390:  6,  p.  145- 

36  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [478 

with  tobacco  raising  that  they  tried  to  turn  their  hands  to 
other  industries  in  spite  of  efforts  made  by  the  authorities  to 
foster  the  tobacco  trade.^^^  No  actual  dechne  in  the  trade 
resulted,  however,  for  the  majority  of  the  colonists,  follow- 
ing their  naturally  lazy  inclinations,  continued  to  plant  to- 
bacco as  the  easier  although  not  always  the  more  profitable 
occupation.  On  the  other  hand,  its  production  did  not  in- 
crease, and  the  twenty-five  years  of  royal  government 
brought  no  marked  change  or  improvement  in  economic  con- 
ditions in  Maryland. 

In  addition  to  the  tobacco  sent  to  England  a  small  amount 
was  exported  to  the  other  colonies,"*^  the  figures  for  the 
years  1 689-1 698  being  as  follows  : — 

Year 
1689 
1690 
169I 
1692 
1693 

The  average  amount  exported  annually  from  Maryland  to 
the  other  plantations  was  therefore  about  320  hogsheads  or 
128,000  pounds,  a  very  small  proportion  of  the  total  export. 
In  all  probability,  then,  neither  the  amount  exported  to 
England  nor  that  sent  to  the  other  plantations  increased  in 
the  years  between  1689  and  171 5.  Furthermore,  the  price 
which  the  Maryland  planter  received  for  his  tobacco  in  the 
home  country  or  in  the  colony  also  continued  more  or  less 
stationary  until  nearly  the  end  of  the  period. 

"5C.  O.  s:  716,  H.  41- 

116  In  a  paper  on  the  state  of  New  England,  written  by  Randolph 
in  answer  to  certain  queries  (1676),  it  was  stated  that  tobacco  was 
imported  into  New  England  from  Virginia  and  Maryland  (Add. 
MSS.  28089,  f.  16,  British  Museum).  Nicholson  also  remarked  on 
the  tobacco  carried  to  New  England  (C.  O.  5:  7I9,  18,  Bundle  3, 
1695),  while  the  Virginia  Council  in  1708  recorded  the  export  of 
some  tobacco  (C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25).  A  trade  was  also  carried  on 
with  Barbadoes,  which  seems,  according  to  most  accounts,  to  have 
been  somewhat  larger  than  that  with  New  England  (Archives,  vol. 
XX,  p.  125;  vol.  XXV,  p.  202;  C.  O.  5:  1309,  24;  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25; 
C.  O.  S:  716,  H.  74). 

ii'^  C.  O.  S  :  749,  passim. 


Amount 

Year 

Amount 

220      hhds. 

1694 

618/  hhds. 

305 

1695 

244/      " 

285/2       " 

1696 

237 

252 

1697 

395 

398            " 

1698 

250         "  11 

479]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  37 

There  were  two  ways  in  which  the  Maryland  planter  sold 
his  crop.  The  first  one  was  to  ship  it,  at  his  own  risk  or 
insured,  to  a  commission  merchant  in  England,  trusting  the 
merchant  to  sell  it  for  him  at  a  price  which  would  pay  the 
freight,  the  duties,  and  the  commission,  besides  insuring  a 
profit  to  the  planter  himself  .^^^  The  merchant  then  returned 
European  goods  to  the  colonial  exporter  to  the  value  of 
what  he  thought  the  profit  on  the  tobacco  consigned  to  him 
would  be.  If,  however,  he  was  later  forced  to  sell  at  a  loss 
or  contracted  a  bad  debt,  the  loss  was  the  planter's  and  the 
latter  fell  into  debt  to  the  merchant.  This  would  force  him, 
in  an  effort  to  clear  himself,  to  send  his  next  crop  to  the  same 
merchant.  If  that,  too,  were  not  profitable,  the  poor  planter 
might  become  heavily  indebted  to  his  London  firm.  This 
was  the  way  in  which  many  of  the  London  merchants  pre- 
ferred to  conduct  their  trade."^  A  paper  in  the  British  Mu- 
seum shows  how  small  the  exporter's  profit  would  be  by  this 
method  of  trade  even  in  a  favorable  year.  A  hogshead  of 
tobacco  in  England  about  1730  brought  £21.  los.,  but  of  this 
amount  the  duty  was  reckoned  at  £16,  the  freight  at  £4,  and 
the  merchant's  commission  at  15s.,  leaving  a  net  profit  of  15s. 
for  the  planter.^-°  In  Rogers's  History  of  Agriculture  and 
Prices  the  retail  prices  of  tobacco  from  1681  to  1715  are  cited 
somewhat  higher  than  this  figure,  ranging  from  2s.  6d.  per 
pound,  £50  per  hogshead,  for  the  best  quality  down  to  is.  3d. 
per  pound,  £25  per  hogshead. ^-^  In  any  case  the  wholesale  price 
which  the  planter  received  would  be  much  smaller  than  this 
retail  rate.  His  profit  therefore  in  the  most  favorable  cir- 
cumstances would  not  be  large,  and  was  always  uncertain.^^* 

^1^  Add.  MSS.  22265,  P-  102,  British  Museum. 

119  C.  O.  5:  131S,  N.  20,  21;  Add.  MSS.  22265,  p.  102,  British 
Museum. 

120  Add.  MSS.  22265,  P-  102,  British  Museum. 

121  J.  E.  T.  Rogers,  History  of  AgricuUure  and  Prices  in  England, 
vol.  vi,  pp.  440-448;  vol.  vii,  pp.  Z72-Z7S- 

122  I  have  been  unable  to  discover  any  list  of  the  prices  which 
tobacco  brought  vihtn  sold  in  this  way  in  England  between  1689  and 
1715.  All  general  statements  about  the  price  are  therefore  based 
entirely  on  the  lists  of  prices  of  tobacco  sold  in  the  colonies. 


38  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [480 

The  president  o£  the  Council  of  Maryland,  writing  home  to 
the  Board  of  Trade  in  1710,  said:  "The  Generallity  of  the 
Planters,  especially  such  as  have  shipped  their  Tobo's  to  their 
Correspondents  in  London  are  become  Greately  Indebted  to 
the  Merchants,  and  very  many  of  their  Plantations  and 
stocks  are  wholy  mortgaged  and  forfeyted  to  them  and  others 
Dayly  Desert  their  Abodes  for  feare  of  being  imprisoned  and 
repair  to  the  southern  Colonys,  viz*-  south  and  north  Carolina 
or  Elsewhere  to  seeke  new  Settlem*^."^-^ 

The  other  method  of  selling  the  annual  crop  was  to  dis- 
pose of  it  as  it  stood  packed  in  the  plantations,  either  to  the 
merchant's  factors  living  there  or  to  the  ship-captains  who 
carried  it  to  England.  Most  of  the  outport  vessels  pur- 
chased their  ladings  in  this  manner.^-*  This  method  was 
more  certain  for  the  planter,  but  gave  him  no  opportunity  to 
take  advantage  of  any  possible  rise  in  the  market  at  home. 
Probably,  too,  he  had  more  difficulty  in  disposing  of  his  crop 
in  the  colony,  as  so  many  of  the  merchants  preferred  the 
other  method  of  shipment — and  the  planter,  because  he  was 
entirely  dependent  on  the  English  fleets,  was  at  the  mer- 
chant's mercy.  Some  tobacco,  however,  was  annually  sold 
in  this  way  in  Maryland,  and  a  list  of  the  prices  paid  in  the 
colony  may  be  compiled  for  a  number  of  years."^  These 
figures  are  as  follows  : — 

Year  Price  per  Lb. 

1697  I^  d. 

1698  1%  " 

1699  2    " 

1700  I3^   " 

1701  "  " 

1702  "  " 

1703  "  " 

1704  "  " 

123  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I.  46. 

124  c.  O.  5:  i3i5,.N.  20. 

125  The  figures  given  in  the  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of 
Imports  and  Exports,  of  "  the  original  cost  or  value  "  of  the  tobacco 
exported  into  England  must  represent  the  price  paid  for  that  part 
of  the  crop  which  the  planters  sold  in  Maryland. 


481]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS    AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  39 

Year  Price  per  Lb. 

1706  ^H  d. 

1707 

1708  "      "   ^^' 

1709 

I7IO 

1711  2J4  " 

1713  "  " '" 

1714  "     ''' 

On  the  whole,  whether  the  colonist  sold  his  tobacco  in 
England  or  as  it  stood  packed  in  the  colony,  the  price  which 
he  received  for  it  was  a  low  one,  even  in  good  years  not 
much  more  than  sufficient  to  pay  him  for  the  expense  of 
growing  it  and  hardly  enough  to  support  himself  and  his 
family.  The  people  therefore  frequently  complained  of  the 
low  prices, ^-^  and  threatened  to  cease  planting  if  the  con- 
ditions of  the  trade  were  not  improved.  The  men  most  in- 
terested in  the  province  attributed  the  continued  low  value 
of  colonial  tobacco  to  several  causes,  for  some  of  which  they 
suggested  possible  remedies.     One  cause  was  undoubtedly 

126  In  1708  Governor  Seymour  stated  concerning  the  price  of  to- 
bacco in  the  colony  that  those  who  laid  out  their  crop  with  the 
merchants  in  the  country  got  only  3s.  6d.  per  hundredweight,  or  less 
than  i^d.  per  pound  (C.  O.  S:  716,  H.  74).  Lloyd  reported  in  1710 
that  the  price  of  tobacco  was  not  above  4s.  per  hundredweight  (C. 
O.  5:  717,  I.  46).  In  view  of  the  official  figures  these  statements  are 
probably  exaggerated,  but  on  the  other  hand  they  may  indicate  that 
in  some  cases  the  official  figures  must  be  modified. 

1-'  In  July,  1712,  President  Lloyd  of  the  Maryland  Council  re- 
ported to  the  Board  of  Trade  a  rise  in  the  price  of  tobacco  (C.  O. 
5:717,1-63). 

128  During  all  this  period  tobacco  was  passmg  current  for  money 
in  the  plantations  at  the  rate  of  id.  per  pound,  although  the  Upper 
House  apparently  succeeded  in  1704  in  having  it  pass  at  the  rate  of 
IDS.  per  100  pounds  in  payment  of  salaries  (Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  pp. 
201,202).  Since  1671  Lord  Baltimore  had  been  accepting  tobacco  for 
his  quit-rents  at  the  rate  of  2d.  per  pound  in  return  for  the  duty  of 
a  shilling  per  hogshead  on  tobacco  exported  from  the  province  (ibid., 
vol.  xxvi,  p.  312;  vol.  xxix,  pp.  161,  166,  185;  vol.  xxx,  pp.  80,  316, 

364). 

129  C.  O.  5 :  714,  25 ;  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I-  (iZ,  I-  75,  L  78,  document  fol- 
lowing I.  78,  not  numbered;  C.  O.  5 :  131S,  N.  yj ;  C.  O.  5:  1316, 
O.  7,  O.  60,  O.  88,  O.  154;  Archives,  vol.  xxix,  p.  352.  A.  MSS.  vol. 
6,  letter  107,  in  the  records  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of 
the  Gospel  refers  to  the  low  price  of  tobacco  in  1711.  A  clergyman 
in  the  colony  writes  that  he  "  can't  subsist  without  some  assistance 
as  Tobacco  our  Money  is  worth  nothing  and  not  one  Shirt  to  be 
had  for  Tobacco  this  Year  in  all  our  Country." 


40  MARYLAND   TR.\DE,   1689-I715  [482 

the  great  wars  which  cut  off  from  English  merchants  the 
foreign  markets  where  they  had  been  accustomed  to  dispose 
of  their  tobacco.  This  deprivation  taught  other  nations 
from  necessity  to  grow  the  plant  for  themselves/^**  but  war 
alone  was  not  felt  to  be  a  complete  explanation  of  the  dis- 
tress of  the  tobacco  colonies.  After  peace  was  declared  in 
1713  the  Lower  House  of  Assembly  presented  an  address 
of  gratitude  to  the  queen,  but  stated  at  the  same  time  that 
w^ar  was  not  the  only  reason  for  the  poverty  of  the  coun- 
^j.y_i3i  'p}-,g  Qthei-  cause,  which  the  colonists  resented  as  a 
great  hindrance  to  their  prosperity,  was  the  high  duty  levied 
on  colonial  tobacco  in  England,  and  earnest  petitions  for 
redress  were  sent  from  both  Maryland  and  Virginia. ^^^  The 
suggestion  from  the  colonies  that  conditions  might  be  bet- 
tered if  the  import  duties  were  lowered  naturally  fell  on 
deaf  ears  in  England,  and  nothing  was  done  in  this  direction. 
The  colonists  had  a  third  grievance,  possibly  more  serious 
to  their  minds  than  either  of  the  other  two.  They  asserted 
that  small  scattered  fleets  often  came  into  the  colony  at  irreg- 
ular intervals,  returning  home  whenever  they  pleased  with 
all  the  tobacco  they  could  secure,  a  practice  which  interfered 
with  the  well-ordered  management  of  the  trade.  This  griev- 
ance was  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment in  February,  1706,  by  Robert  Quaryof  Pennsylvania."^ 
He  asked  that  only  one  fleet  a  year  might  be  sent  to  the  colo- 
nies, as  there  was  but  one  crop  of  tobacco  annually.  The 
certain  coming  of  one  fleet,  he  claimed,  would  settle  and  fix 
the  price  in  England  and  abroad,  whereas  when  there  was 
no  such  certainty  the  price  tended  to  fluctuate  more  widely. 
Heated  controversy  followed  in  England  over  the  effect 
which  the  adoption  of  this  suggestion  would  have  on  the 
trade.     The  merchants  of  London  favored  an  annual  fleet, 

130  C.  O.  5 :  717,  document  between  I.  78  and  79,  Representation  of 
the  President's  Council  and  Assembly  in  Maryland  to  the  Lords 
Commissioners  for  Trade  and  Plantations;  C.  O.  5:  3,  Feb.  2, 
170S/6,  153;  C.  O.  S:  746,  pp.  8,  9. 

131  Archives,  vol.  xxix,  p.  354. 

132  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  75;  C.  O.  s:  1316,  O.  154. 

133  C.  O.  5 :  3-  Feb.  2,  1705/6. 


483]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  4I 

because  they  knew  that  a  large  part  of  it  would  come  from 
their  city.  The  outport  merchants  on  the  other  hand,  real- 
izing that  this  scheme  would  place  them  at  a  disadvantage, 
contended  that  it  would  be  better  to  have  the  annual  crop 
arrive  in  separate  consignments  and  be  sold  gradually  in 
order  to  prevent  the  market  from  becoming  glutted. ^^*  The 
colonies  naturally  supported  Quary  in  his  contention,  object- 
ing strongly  to  the  arrival  in  the  provinces  of  small  fleets  at 
frequent  intervals.^^^  The  representations  of  Quary  and  the 
London  merchants  were  successful,  probably  because  of  the 
pressure  which  the  latter  could  bring  to  bear  on  the  Board  of 
Trade  as  well  as  because  of  the  strength  of  their  arguments ; 
the  Board  therefore  approved  of  Quary's  suggestion,"^  and 
in  February,  1706/7,  an  Order  in  Council  was  issued  direct- 
ing a  convoy  to  be  prepared  for  Virginia  and  Maryland  for 
that  season  as  soon  as  possible,  and  succeeding  convoys  to  be 
sent  annually.""^  Unfortunately  it  is  impossible  to  discover 
from  the  records  whether  the  order  was  carefully  observed 
and,  if  so,  whether  it  had  any  effect  upon  the  trade.  As  the 
price  of  the  commodity  was  not  raised  until  peace  was  in 

13*  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  20,  Protest  of  Whitehaven  merchants;  C.  O. 
5:  1315,  N.  23,  An  anonymous  letter  arguing  for  one  fleet  annually; 
C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  26,  Sentiments  of  the  merchants  from  Liverpool; 
C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  31,  33,  Quary's  answer  to  objections  against  his 
plan;  C.  O.  5  :  1315,  N.  21,  An  argument  of  some  merchants  trading 
in  London  against  this  plan. 

135  In  1695  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence  seems  to  have  objected  to  the 
fact  that  fleets  came  only  once  a  year  to  Maryland  by  reason  of  the 
convoys  (C.  O.  5:  713,  115)  ;  but  from  1697,  when  Nicholson  asked 
that  the  fleets  arrive  before  April,  1698  (C.  O.  5:  714,  25),  the  colony 
was  firm  in  the  opinion  that  an  annual  fleet  was  necessary  for  its 
prosperity.  Later  Nicholson  seems  to  have  wanted  this  fleet  to 
arrive  in  the  autumn  (C.  O.  5:  1313,  4  (i),  16  (i)).  "This  method 
[the  one  fleet],"  Virginia  stated,  "would  be  attended  with  abundance 
of  good  Consequences  [to]  the  Trade,  Time  would  be  allowed  for 
the  consumption  of  one  years  Crop  before  the  market  were  troubled 
with  another,  and  the  plenty  of  ships  and  goods  in  this  Country  at 
one  time  would  make  Tobacco  to  be  more  in  demand,  and  goods 
more  plenteous,  and  vendible  at  more  reasonable  Rates,  and  the  car- 
riage more  safe  and  secure  before  the  winter,  which  season  proves 
commonly  fatal  to  the  Fleets,  and  impossible  to  keep  Convoy  in" 
(C.  O.  5:  131S,  N.  37). 

136  C.  O.  5:  3,  121,  April  26,  1706. 
13TC.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  64. 


42  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [484 

sight,  it  is  improbable  that  the  provision  for  one  fleet  a  year 
made  very  much  difference. 

With  the  year  171 1,  however,  the  price  of  tobacco  sold  in 
the  colony  increased  by  3^4  penny  per  pound,  rising  from  i^ 
pence  to  2%  pence  per  pound,  a  price  at  which  it  remained 
at  least  until  1715.^^^  The  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices 
does  not  show  an  increase  in  the  price  of  tobacco  sold  in 
England  during  this  period,^^®  but  the  evidence  of  the  official 
figures  for  sales  in  the  colonies  indicates  that  even  the  pros- 
pect of  peace  with  France,  contrary  to  contemporary  im- 
pressions,"*' must  have  had  a  somewhat  favorable  effect  on 
colonial  commerce.  The  war  was  about  to  end  and  the  dan- 
ger from  French  ships  to  disappear.  Trade  tended  to  be- 
come less  restricted.  The  price  of  tobacco  was  still  low,  only 
2.y\  pence  a  pound,  but  at  least  it  was  higher  than  at  the 
beginning  of  the  century.  This  increase  at  the  end  of  the 
period  of  royal  government  would  seem  to  indicate  that  an 
era  of  somewhat  greater  prosperity  in  the  production  of 
their  staple  commodity  was  about  to  dawn  for  the  colonists 
of  Maryland. 

The  revenue  furnished  by  the  tobacco  trade,  both  to  the 
king  and  to  the  proprietor,  is  also  of  importance  in  the  con- 
sideration of  this  chief  export  of  Maryland.  Although  the 
planters,  discouraged  at  the  prevalent  low  prices,  were  not 
inclined  to  increase  the  amount  of  tobacco  which  they  were 
producing,  the  English  government,  on  account  of  the  rev- 
enue, was  careful  to  extend  protection  to  the  trade.  In  the 
beginning,  it  is  true,  the  English  had  opposed  tobacco  cul- 
ture and  had  tried  to  establish  other  industries  in  Maryland, 
but  it  was  not  long  before  the  importance  of  the  new  com- 
modity was  seen  and  its  almost  exclusive  growth  was  zeal- 
ously encouraged.  By  the  end  of  the  century  every  gov- 
ernor who  went  to  Maryland  was  convinced  of  the  importance 
of  preserving  the  staple  and  discouraging  all  other  forms  of 

138  See  page  39. 

139  Vol.  vii,  pp.  yjTy  iv,  374  iv. 

1*0  See  the  passage  from  the  Assembly  Journal  of  1714,  quoted 
on  pages  27-28. 


485]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  43 

industry.  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence,  secretary  of  Maryland, 
wrote  home  in  1695  complaining  that  when  few  ships  came 
into  Maryland  some  counties  in  the  colony  "almost  cloath 
themselves  by  their  linnen  and  woollen  Manufactures  and 
plant  little  Tobacco  which  learning  of  one  another  they  leave 
off  planting."  He  "  humbly  offered  "  it  to  "  Consideration 
whither  an  Act  of  Parliament  in  England  ought  not  to  pass 
for  Prohibiting  the  planting  of  Cotton  in  these  Colonys.""^ 
The  Board  of  Trade  in  a  letter  to  Governor  Seymour,  1708/9, 
remarked :  "  We  are  glad  to  find,  the  Inhabitants  of  Mary- 
land do  not  apply  themselves  to  Manufactures,  which  ought 
to  be  imported  from  this  Kingdom ;  And  We  doubt  not  but 
they  will  be  Supply 'd  therewith  from  hence,  that  they  will  not 
need  to  turn  their  thoughts  to  anything  but  the  Culture  of 
Tobacco.""-  Again,  the  reason  that  the  Commissioners  of 
the  Customs  gave  for  repealing  the  bill  for  ports  in  Vir- 
ginia in  1709  was  that  such  an  act  would  increase  the  ease  of 
manufacturing  in  towns  and  prevent  the  due  cultivation  of 
tobacco.^*^  Several  other  instances  might  also  be  given  to 
show  the  anxiety  of  the  home  government  to  foster  the 
trade.  This  anxiety  may  be  easily  understood  when  one  con- 
siders the  number  of  imperial  duties  levied  on  tobacco  im- 
ported into  England  and  the  amount  of  revenue  those  duties 
produced. 

In  1660  a  law  of  Charles  II  granting  a  subsidy  of  tonnage 
and  poundage  to  the  king  levied  a  duty  of  a  penny  a  pound 
on  tobacco  at  entry  and  an  additional  penny  a  pound  payable 
nine  months  after  importation.^**  No  other  duty  was  im- 
posed until  1685,  when,  in  spite  of  some  opposition  on  the 
ground  that  any  further  levy  would  greatly  discourage  the 
trade,"^  a  new  impost  of  three  pence  a  pound,  payable 

141  C.  O.  5:  713,  115;  C.  O.  5:  1314,  M.  62. 

1*-  C.  O.  5:   727,  p.    112. 

143  C.  O.  5:  13 16,  O.  44,  45,  SO. 

144  Statutes  of  the  Realm,  London,  1810-1822,  vol.  v,  p.  i8r.  12 
Charles  II,  c.  4.  In  this  study  the  references  to  the  laws  of  England 
are  all  made  from  the  Statutes  of  the  Realm. 

14'^  Harleian  MSS.  1238,  f.  2,  British  Museum,  The  Advantages  of 
the  Tobacco  Trade. 


44  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [486 

eighteen  months  after  importation,  was  laid  on  all  tobacco. ^^® 
The  duty  was  not  again  raised  until  1698,  when  another  sub- 
sidy of  tonnage  and  poundage,  increasing  the  rate  another 
penny,  and  payable  this  time  within  three  months,  was  given 
to  William  III.^^^  Finally,  in  1703  Anne  received  from  Par- 
liament a  one-third  subsidy  grant  which  made  the  duty  one 
third  of  a  penny  higher.^*^  This  brought  the  duties  up  to 
six  and  one  third  pence  a  pound  levied  on  all  tobacco  im- 
ported into  England.  Certain  reductions  or  allowances 
were  made,  however,  for  cash  and  for  the  prompt  payment 
of  all  those  duties  which  could  be  bonded  for  three,  nine,  or 
eighteen  months  as  the  case  might  be.  One  half  of  the  first 
subsidy  of  a  penny  a  pound  and  the  whole  of  all  the  other 
duties  were  drawn  back  or  refunded  to  the  merchant  who 
reexported  within  twelve  months  any  tobacco  that  had  paid 
the  duties.  In  1685  the  time  allowed  for  reexport  was  in- 
creased to  eighteen  months.^*®  Debentures  were  allowed 
for  all  damaged  tobacco  that  came  into  the  kingdom,  the 
collectors  allowing  for  the  amount  of  damage  after  an  ex- 
amination had  been  made  by  two  disinterested  judges.^^" 
Allowances  were  made  for  shrinkage  of  the  amount  imported 
during  the  voyage  to  England.  To  sum  up  :  During  most  of 
the  period  of  royal  government  tobacco  that  was  consumed 
in  England  paid  six  and  one  third  pence  per  pound  duties, 
while  that  reexported  was  liable  to  a  duty  of  one  half  penny 
per  pound,  both  duties  being  materially  lessened  by  various 
allowances. 

That  the  London  merchants  and  the  colonial  planters  felt 
these  duties  to  be  too  high  and  the  regulations  for  their  pay- 
ment extremely  hard,  even  with  all  allowances  made,  is  amply 
demonstrated. ^^^     The  case  of  the  merchants  whose  ships 

1*6  I  James  II,  c.  4. 

"7  9  William  III,  c.  23. 

"8  2  &  3  Anne,  c.  18. 

1*9  I  James  II,  c.  4. 

1^0  12  Charles  II,  c.  4. 

^^1  House  of  Lords  MSS.,  June  5,  1714.  Mr.  Beer  has  pointed  out 
that  of  course  these  import  duties  were  ultimately  paid  by  the  con- 
sumer, but  that  the  English  government  and  the  colonists  thought 


487]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  45 

lay  in  the  Thames  ten  months  with  four  thousand  hogsheads 
of  tobacco  on  board  because  the  importers  could  not  afford 
to  pay  the  duties  was  a  particularly  hard  one,  but  it  well 
illustrated  the  necessity  for  more  lenient  regulations.^^-  The 
English  government  was  too  much  in  need  of  revenue  to 
lower  the  duties,  but  the  act  of  1713,  which  encouraged  the 
trade,  besides  relieving  the  specific  case  of  the  ships  in  the 
Thames  made  all  the  duties  payable  under  easier  conditions 
and  made  uniform  allowances  for  damage,  shrinkage,  and  so 
on.^^^  This  law  was,  however,  passed  only  at  the  very  end 
of  the  period  of  royal  government  in  Maryland,  and  the 
revenue  from  tobacco  which  the  English  government  re- 
ceived between  1689  and  171 5  was  for  the  most  part  col- 
lected under  the  old  regulations. 

It  is  possible  to  indicate  only  in  a  general  way  the  actual 
amount  of  such  revenue. ^^*  The  gross  receipts  from  the 
tobacco  duties  seem  to  have  averaged  about  £350,000  annu- 
ally,^^^  and  the  net  income  to  the  government  was  probably 

that  the  latter  paid  them.  As  he  says,  they  really  "  affected  the  colo- 
nial producer  only  to  the  limited  extent  that  they  restricted  the 
available  demand  by  enhancing  the  retail  price"  (The  Old  Colonial 
System,  1660-1754,  part  i,  vol.  i,  pp.  35,  36). 

152  Treasury  Papers,  clxiv,  7. 

^^"  13  Anne,  c.  8. 

15*1  have  used  a  number  of  documents  in  attempting  to  find  out 
the  amount  of  revenue  from  the  tobacco  duties :  Declared  Accounts, 
Audit  and  Pipe  Offices,  several  different  collections  of  Treasury 
papers,  and  Stowe  MSS.  316,  324,  Sloane  MSS.  2902,  and  Harleian 
MSS.  1238,  in  the  British  Museum.  No  two  accounts  for  the  same 
year  agree  at  all  closely,  and  it  has  been  next  to  impossible  to  tell 
which  set  of  figures  was  most  nearly  correct.  Even  the  comptroller 
general's  account  and  that  of  the  receiver  general  of  the  customs  in 
Declared  Accounts  were  evidently  in  some  way  based  on  different 
calculations  because  their  figures  for  the  imposts  on  tobacco  are 
quite  unlike.  Sometimes  the  accounts  are  made  out  from  Christmas 
to  Christmas,  and  again  from  Michaelmas  to  Michaelmas,  or  from 
Lady  Day  to  Lady  Day ;  some  are  probably  not  complete  for  a 
whole  year,  and  others  do  not  include  all  of  the  several  duties. 
There  is  no  way  of  telling  what  they  do  include.  The  most  that 
can  be  done  is  to  look  over  all  these  accounts  carefully,  and,  by 
using  those  official  figures  which  seem  most  nearly  correct,  to  com- 
pute an  average  amount  which  will  at  least  give  some  idea  of  the 
revenue  received  by  the  Custom  House  during  a  year. 

155  This  account  is  compiled  from  Sloane  MSS.  2902,  f.  114,  British 
Museum,  for  the  years  from  1692-1695  inclusive;  and  from  Declared 
Accounts,  Audit  Office,  Bundles  621-644,  from  1695-1715. 


46  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [488 

not  far  from  iioo,ooo.^^*'  Of  this  revenue  Maryland  to- 
bacco must  have  paid  a  little  over  one  third,  or  about  £36,000. 
It  may  be  easily  understood,  therefore,  that,  for  this  reason 
if  for  no  other,  the  careful  protection  of  the  tobacco  industry 
in  Virginia  and  Maryland  was  the  consistent  policy  of  the 
English  government.  Principally  from  this  care  for  their 
revenue  came  the  consideration  of  the  government  for  the 
petitions  of  the  London  tobacco  merchants,  the  anxiety  to 
increase  the  continental  trade  in  tobacco,  and  finally  the  law 
of  17 1 3  for  encouraging  the  trade.  Tobacco  was  an  import 
of  great  value  to  England,  and  the  preservation  and  increase 
of  the  industry  were  objects  of  much  care. 

The  interests  of  the  British  government  led  them  not  only 
to  encourage  the  trade  by  concessions,  but  also  to  pass  laws 
to  prevent  the  evasion  of  the  high  duties.  The  importation 
of  tobacco  in  bulk  rather  than  in  hogshead  was  prohibited 
mainly  on  this  score.  The  chief  difficulty  with  which  the 
authorities  had  to  deal  was  the  ease  with  which  the  duty 
could  be  drawn  back  by  debenture  for  reexport  and  the 
tobacco  landed  again  without  paying  the  duty.  Proposals 
were  made  by  several  persons  to  remedy  this  and  other  de- 
fects in  the  customs  regulations,^^'''  and  a  law  was  passed 
inflicting  a  severe  penalty  for  any  attempt  to  evade  pay- 
ment of  the  duties  in  this  manner.^^^  So,  hand  in  hand  with 
the  systematic  encouragement  of  the  legitimate  trade  in 
tobacco  went  naturally  a  severe  repression  of  any  attempt 
at  smuggling  the  commodity  into  England,  both  policies  being 
the  result  of  the  anxiety  of  the  government  to  preserve  and 
increase  its  revenues. 

15^  Treasury  Accounts,  Revenue  Yearly,  vols,  i-iv,  give  the  net 
receipts  on  tobacco  after  all  duties  have  been  paid  as  about  ^90,000. 
Harleian  MSS.  1238,  f.  2,  British  Museum,  makes  the  net  revenue 
on  tobacco  larger  than  this,  but  the  figures  are  in  round  numbers 
and  there  is  no  way  of  verifying  them.  The  revenue  is  given  in 
the  Harleian  MSS.  as  from  £100,000  to  £130,000.  Compare  also 
Mr.  Beer's  account  of  the  revenue  derived  from  the  tobacco  impost 
between  1688  and  1692  (Old  Colonial  System,  vol.  i,  p.  166). 

157  Harleian  MSS.  1238,  f.  i,  f.  29,  British  Museum;  Sloane  MSS. 
2717,  f.  48,  54-61,  British  Museum. 

158  8  Anne,  c.  14. 


489]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  47 

Not  only  did  the  tobacco  trade  pay  a  large  sum  in  import 
duties  in  England,  but  the  English  officials  in  Maryland  were 
almost  entirely  supported  by  the  income  derived  from  an 
export  duty  levied  on  the  commodity.  The  most  important 
of  the  tobacco  duties  through  which  the  colony  obtained  its 
revenue  was  the  export  duty  of  two  shillings  per  hogshead. 
This  duty  was  first  levied  in  1671  and  continued  to  be  im- 
posed between  1689  and  1715.  One  half  was  used  for  the 
support  of  the  government,  while  the  other  half  went  to 
the  proprietor.  When  the  royal  government  was  established 
in  Maryland,  the  proprietor  was  allowed  to  keep  his  half  of 
the  duty,^^^  while  three  fourths  of  the  half  for  the  support 
of  the  government  was  paid  to  the  royal  governor  and  one 
fourth  for  arms  for  the  defence  of  the  province.  Two  other 
duties  on  tobacco  were  collected  during  the  period  of  royal 
government.  The  first  one,  levied  in  1692,  was  three  pence 
per  hogshead  for  the  use  of  the  governor  during  his  term  of 
office.  This  provision  continued  to  be  made  for  every  gov- 
ernor up  to  1715.^*'°  By  a  law,  passed  in  May,  1695,  and  re- 
enacted  in  1696, 1701, 1704, 1708,  and  1714,  a  second  duty  of 
three  pence  per  hogshead  was  levied  to  defray  the  public 
charges  of  the  province. ^"^  The  money  gained  by  this  duty 
was  used  at  first  for  building  the  church  at  Annapolis,  but 
was  later  put  to  other  uses  as  the  need  arose.  These  three 
laws  together  made  the  customs  duty  two  shillings  and  six 
pence  on  every  hogshead  of  tobacco^  exported  from  the 
province. 

If  it  may  be  taken  for  granted  that  Maryland  exported 
about  25,320  hogsheads  of  tobacco  annually,^*^^  then  the 
income  derived  from  the  shilling  duty,  which  was  entirely 
devoted  to  the  support  of  the  government  each  year,  must 
have   been   about   ii266.     One    fourth   of    this,    or    about 

159  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  235. 

160  Ibid. ^  vol.  xiii,  p.  441;  vol.  xix,  p.  455;  vol.  xxii,  pp.  480,  496; 
vol.  xxiv,  p.  416;  vol.  xxix,  p.  442. 

i*^!  Ibid.,  vol.  xix,  pp.  193,  375 ;  vol.  xxiv,  pp.  202,  414 ;  vol.  xxvi, 
P-  347;  vol.  xxvii,  p.  Z72\  vol.  xxix,  p.  443. 
1*^-  See  above,  pages  35,  36. 


48  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [49^ 

£316.  los.,  was  supposed  to  be  spent  annually  for  arms  for 
the  province,  and  the  remainder  went  to  pay  the  governor's 
salary.  But  the  additional  duty  of  three  pence  per  hogs- 
head, also  paid  to  the  governor,  secured  to  him  an  annual 
salary  of  £1266.  The  extant  records  for  specific  years  natu- 
rally do  not  agree  with  this  estimate  of  the  salary,  which  is 
based  on  the  Custom  House  figures,  but  their  evidence  does 
imply  that  it  could  not  have  averaged  less  than  £1266.  The 
Account  of  Revenues  in  the  Plantacons  in  America  by  John 
Povey  (August  26,  1701)  stated  that  in  Maryland  one  half 
of  the  impost  applied  to  the  use  of  the  government  amounted 
in  1700  to  £1786.  I2s.  6d/''^  Mr.  Blathwayt  in  a  Report 
Concerning  the  Revenues  of  the  Plantations  in  America, 
dated  March  22,  1702/3,  estimated  that  the  half  of  the  two 
shillings  duty  appropriated  to  the  government  for  the  year 
1701  amounted  to  £1605.  15s.  6d.^®*  A  report  of  the  Board 
of  Trade  for  1703  gave  the  salary  of  the  governor  of  Mary- 
land for  1701  as  about  £1700."^  A  list  of  governors,  pre- 
sented to  the  Committee  of  Accounts  in  England  about  171 1, 
contains  the  following  statement  with  regard  to  Maryland : 
"John  Corbett,  Esqr  appointed  Govern'",  by  Her  Maj^^in  the 
room  of  the  late  Coll  Seymour  deceas'd,  to  whom  ye  Assem- 
bly had  given  for  his  Life  %  of  2^  p  Hhd  on  Tobacco  ex- 
ported &  ye  whole  Addit"  Duty  of  3*^  p  Hhd  on  Tobacco 
exported  &  3^  p  Tunn  on  all  Ships  &  Vessells  trading  thither 
and  not  belonging  to  the  Province,  which  all  together 
amounted  yearly  to  about  £1600."^*"'  In  some  years,  there- 
fore, the  governor  must  have  received  considerably  more 
than  £1266.^*''     His  salary  was  always  increased  by  certain 

163  Treasury,  64:  89,  p.  48. 

164  Treasury  Papers,  Ixxxv,  22. 

165  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  430. 

166  Treasury,  64  :  90,  p.  55. 

16^  Besides  the  specific  figures  given  in  the  text  there  are  also  in 
the  Archives  several  accounts  of  the  tobacco  imposts  which  do  not 
agree  much  more  closely  than  the  others  with  the  stated  sum  of 
£1266.  I  have,  however,  in  spite  of  all  discrepancies,  considered  it 
best  to  use  the  lists  already  compiled  for  the  amount  of  tobacco 
exported,  because  they  are  for  the  most  part  official  figures,  regu- 
larly added  from  Lady  Day  to  Lady  Day,  while  it  is  often  extremely 
uncertain  how  long  a  time  the  collector's  figures  include. 


49 1  ]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND    CHIEF    EXPORTS  49 

perquisites  of  his  office,  such  as  fees  and  a  small  tonnage 
duty/"®  consequently  the  position  was  one  not  to  be  despised 
by  any  needy  officer  of  the  king.^*^®  The  governor,  more- 
over, was  not  dependent  on  the  legislature  year  by  year,  for 
although  the  other  expenses  of  the  government  were  met  by 
detailed  annual  appropriations,^^"  the  salary  of  the  governor 
was  definitely  fixed  from  the  beginning  of  the  royal  period 
by  a  permanent  grant  of  the  shilling  per  hogshead  for  his 
support.^'^  In  case  of  a  dispute  with  his  legislature  the 
governor  of  Maryland  could  afford  to  be  less  subservient 
than  the  governors  of  New  York  or  Massachusetts,  who 
were  dependent  on  annual  salary  grants. 

The  total  revenue  that  accrued  to  the  royal  government 
and  to  the  proprietor  from  the  export  duties  on  tobacco  in 
Maryland  must  have  been  about  ^3165  per  annum.  It  was 
natural  that  the  English  authorities  should  demand  regular 
accounts  of  their  share  of  this  revenue.  Such  accounts 
were  frequently  sent  home,  but  there  was  often  complaint 
that  they  were  too  general,  that  the  vouchers  for  payment 
were  not  included,  or  that  they  were  unsatisfactory  for  other 

168  -phe  tonnage  duty  was  imposed  in  September,  1694,  for  the 
benefit  of  Governor  Nicholson  during  his  term  of  offic^.  This  act 
was  unlimited  in  its  duration,  and  must  have  been  in  operation  at 
least  until  1700,  when  John  Povey  estimated  that  this  duty  had 
amounted  that  year  to  £186.  i6s.  (Treasury,  64:  89,  p.  48). 

169  That  the  payment  of  the  governor's  salary  was  fairly  regular 
the  frequent  accounts  in  the  Archives  imply,  although  a  certain  pro- 
portion of  it  was  probably  lost  through  insufficient  securities  for 
bonds  or  bad  bills  of  exchange  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  247,  295-296; 
vol.  xxiii,  p.  124;  vol.  XXV,  pp.  54,  55). 

i"o  H.  L.  Osgood  bears  witness  to  the  care  with  which  appropria- 
tions were  made  in  Maryland.  "  In  the  English  provinces,  with  the 
exception  of  New  York,  the  proprietors  and  their  officials  were  de- 
pendent from  the  first  on  their  legislatures  for  appropriations.  .  .  . 
After  the  middle  of  the  century,  the  appropriation  acts  in  Maryland 
became  very  detailed  and  specific.  ...  As  expenditures  increased, 
the  list  of  items  became  larger  and  the  acts  contained  an  ever  grow- 
ing accumulation  of  details.  Under  this  system, — and  it  was  one 
which  came  to  exist  in  many  of  the  provinces, — though  the  treas- 
urers were  appointed  by  the  proprietor  or  his  governor,  and  though 
they  paid  out  money  exclusively  on  the  governor's  warrant,  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  executive  in  the  matter  of  expenditures  was  effectively 
limited"  (American  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  370-372). 

1"  1  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  437 ;  vol.  xxvi,  p.  312. 

4 


50  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [492 

reasons.^'-  The  effort  to  keep  track  of  the  tobacco  revenue 
and  of  provincial  expenditure  was  one  phase  of  the  general 
attempt  of  the  English  government  to  control  more  closely 
the  administration  of  the  colonies. 

One  other  branch  of  the  revenue  accruing  to  the  govern- 
ment from  tobacco  either  in  England  or  in  the  colony  still  re- 
mains for  discussion :  the  penny  a  pound  on  all  tobacco  ex- 
ported to  other  plantations.  This  duty,  with  others,  was 
levied  by  the  English  government  in  the  act  of  1672  "  For 
the  incouragement  of  the  Greeneland  and  Eastland  Trades, 
and  for  the  better  securing  the  Plantation  Trade,"^'^^  and  its 
purpose  was  not  so  much  to  obtain  revenue  as  to  "  prevent 
exportation  of  goods  from  Colony  to  Colony  and  so  to 
foreign  countries  in  Europe,  evading  the  English  customs."^'* 
By  this  act  a  collector  was  to  be  appointed  in  each  province 
to  enforce  the  payment  of  these  duties  from  all  persons  ex- 
porting certain  goods  elsewhere  than  to  England,  Wales, 
and  Berwick-on-Tweed.  The  amount  of  tobacco  exported 
from  Maryland  to  other  colonies  was,  as  has  been  stated 
above,^"  about  320  hogsheads  per  annum,  or  about  128,000 
pounds.  A  duty  of  a  penny  a  pound  on  this  amount  would 
therefore  come  to  about  iSZZ-^"'^  Of  this  the  British  gov- 
ernment at  first  received  one  fourth,  one  half  went  to  the 
collector,  and  the  remaining  fourth  to  the  surveyor  of  the 

i''^  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  476;  Treasury,  64:  89,  p.  17;  Treasury 
Papers,  Ivii,  44. 

1^325  Charles  II,  c.  7. 

"4  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2306. 

I'^s  See  page  36. 

^^^  An  actual  account  of  the  penny  a  pound  in  Maryland  for  the 
year  1678  has  been  preserved.  In  this  year  Christopher  Rousby  col- 
lected ^347.  13s.  2d.  from  the  duty  on  tobacco  sent  to  other  planta- 
tions. As  this  was  an  early  account,  and  made  for  Patuxent  Dis- 
trict only,  it  tends  to  confirm  the  average  amount  of  £533  collected 
annually  during  the  period  of  royal  government  (Audit  Office,  Ac- 
counts Various,  589,  The  State  of  the  Acco*^  of  his  Ma"^'  Cus- 
tomes  in  the  American  Plantacons  Stated  w*''  the  Acco'^  of  his 
Ma*'*^  Customes  in  England  &c.  for  the  Yeare  ending  at  Michas : 
1678).  In  June,  1692,  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  stated  to 
the  Lords  of  the  Treasury  that  if  the  duty  of  a  penny  a  pound  were 
well  collected  it  would  bring  in  £300  or  £400  above  the  cost  of  col- 
lection (Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2306). 


493]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND    CHIEF    EXPORTS  5 1 

customs  in  Alaryland.  In  1694^"  it  was  decided  that  the 
money  from  this  duty  in  Virginia  and  Maryland  should  be 
paid  to  the  College  of  William  and  Mary  in  Virginia,  and  in 
the  following  year  the  salary  of  the  collector  for  the  collec- 
tion of  the  penny  a  pound  was  lowered  to  twenty  per  cent, 
with  one  third  of  all  forfeitures.  The  duty  of  comptroller 
or  surveyor  of  this  account  was  assumed  by  the  rector  of  the 
college,  in  order  that  its  revenue  might  be  increased.  After 
this  time  most  of  the  revenue  from  the  penny-a-pound  duty 
in  Maryland  was  paid  to  the  college,  but  it  never  provided 
a  very  substantial  source  of  income. 

This  brings  to  a  close  the  discussion  of  the  most  important 
staple  produced  in  Maryland.  It  has  been  shown  that  to- 
bacco was  almost  the  only  product  grown  for  profit,  and  that 
the  inhabitants  were  exclusively  occupied  in  its  production. 
While  the  royal  governors  were  in  Maryland  the  amount 
grown  for  export  averaged  about  25,320  hogsheads  annually. 
The  price  of  tobacco  in  England  was  low  and  the  province 
was  far  from  prosperous.  Toward  the  end  of  the  period  of 
royal  government,  however,  on  account  either  of  the  pros- 
pect of  peace,  or  of  the  annual  fleets,  or  perhaps  because  the 
market  was  not  glutted  by  a  surplus  amount,  the  price  in  the 
colony  rose  from  one  and  three  fourths  pence  per  pound  in 
1710  to  two  and  one  fourth  pence  in  171 1, — a  fact  which 
argued  hopefully  for  the  colonists.  Almost  all  the  tobacco 
raised  in  Maryland  was  apparently  shipped  directly  to  Eng- 
land, and  the  large  revenue,  nearly  iioo,ooo,  annually  re- 
ceived from  colonial  tobacco  by  the  duties  on  its  import  gave 
rise  to  the  greatest  care  in  the  protection  of  the  industry  and 
eventually  in  1713  to  the  law  easing  the  conditions  of  import 
into  England.  The  slight  rise  in  price,  combined  with  this 
improvement  in  the  arrangements  made  for  collecting  the 

1^''  The  first  proposal  to  paj'  the  duty  to  the  college  was  not  ac- 
cepted by  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs.  They  proposed  that 
the  collector  should  receive  a  regular  salary  from  the  proceeds  of 
the  duty,  and  that  the  tobacco,  in  which  it  was  usually  paid,  should 
be  sold  in  England.  The  balance,  if  there  was  any,  might  go  to  the 
college  (Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2306).  For  arrangement  reached 
in  1694  and  1695  see  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  123,  341. 


52  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [494 

duties  on  tobacco  in  England,  while  not  altering  conditions 
during  the  twenty-five  years  of  royal  government,  certainly 
would  seem  to  foreshadow  prosperity  for  the  future. 

It  was  thus  in  line  with  England's  general  colonial  policy 
that  Maryland  should  devote  herself  exclusively  to  the  pro- 
duction of  tobacco,  and  should  neglect  to  exploit  her  natural 
resources  of  fur  and  fish  or  to  raise  food-stuffs  for  exporta- 
tion. There  was,  however,  one  important  respect  in  which 
this  attitude  of  the  government  was  qualified,  to  wit,  in 
regard  to  naval  stores,  to  the  production  of  which  the  Eng- 
lish statesmen  at  the  end  of  the  century  were  more  than 
willing  to  give  definite  encouragement.  Indeed,  from  the 
beginnings  of  English  colonization  it  had  been  considered 
desirable  that  the  colonies  should  furnish  naval  stores  in 
order  that  the  English  navy  might  not  be  dependent  for  its 
existence  on  imports  from  foreign  and  possibly  hostile 
countries.  At  first  in  the  southern  colonies  the  production 
of  such  stores  was  encouraged  even  at  the  expense  of  to- 
bacco as  being  more  directly  profitable  to  England.  Mary- 
land promoters  from  the  beginning  reported  that  the  soil  of 
the  province  was  suitable  for  the  growth  of  hemp  and  flax, 
and  that  pitch  and  tar  could  be  easily  obtained  from  the 
neighboring  woods. ^'^^  Undoubtedly  the  production  of  such 
commodities  should  be  encouraged  by  the  home  and  colonial 
governments.  In  1664,  when  the  price  of  tobacco  had 
fallen  very  low  and  the  colonists  were  greatly  in  debt,  the 
English  government  directed  that  hemp,  pitch,  and  tar  be 
brought  into  the  kingdom  customs  free  for  five  years,  for 
the  purpose,  as  the  Lords  Committee  of  Trade  of  the  Privy 
Council  put  it,  of  encouraging  "  the  planters  to  apply  them- 
selves to  the  planting  of  other  commodities. which  may  be  of 
more  benefit  than  tobacco."^^^     In  Maryland  the  colonial 

1^8  A  Relation  of  Maryland,  p.  27.  A  Relation  of  the  Colony  of 
Lord  Baron  of  Baltimore  in  Maryland  near  Virginia,  in  Force 
Tracts,  vol.  iv,  no.  12,  p.  7.  The  Relation  of  the  Successful  Begin- 
nings of  Lord  Baltimore's  Plantation  in  Maryland,  in  Shea,  Early 
Southern  Tracts,  1865,  p.  22. 

1^9  E.  L.  Lord,  Industrial  Experiments  in  the  British  Colonies  of 
North  America,  in  Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies,  extra  volume 
xvii,  p.  5. 


495]  STAPLE   PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF   EXPORTS  53 

legislature  supported  the  effort  to  grow  hemp  and  flax  by 
the  passage  of  a  number  of  laws,  in  1671,  1683,  and  1688.^*° 
Unfortunately  this  legislation  had  but  little  effect,  and  the 
amount  of  hemp  and  flax  raised  in  the  province  during  the 
proprietary  period  was  inconsiderable. 

By  the  end  of  the  century  the  point  of  view  of  England 
concerning  tobacco  had  radically  changed,  but  the  question 
of  securing  naval  stores  for  her  fleet  continued  to  be  a  vital 
consideration.  She  was  at  war  with  France,  and  the  trade 
for  naval  stores  with  the  Baltic  was  in  a  most  unsatisfactory 
condition. ^^^  All  the  colonies,  whatever  their  chief  occupa- 
tion, must  be  encouraged  to  produce  naval  stores  also.  The 
commission  sent  to  America  by  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1698 
confined  its  attention  to  the  investigation  of  the  conditions 
for  the  production  of  such  stores  in  the  northern  colonies,^®^ 
and  at  first  no  emphasis  was  laid  on  producing  them  in  Mary- 
land. The  importance  assigned  to  the  whole  question  in 
England,  however,  did  influence  the  resident  royal  officials 
in  Maryland  to  emphasize  strongly  in  their  letters  to  the 
home  government  the  suitability  of  that  province  for  the 
production  of  naval  stores  as  well  as  of  tobacco.  Edward 
Randolph  sent  a  memorial  to  William  Blathwayt,  the  audi- 
tor general  of  plantation  revenues  in  England,  offering  to  sur- 
vey the  woods  in  the  plantations,  and  stating  that  there  was 
much  oak  timber  for  ship-building  in  New  England,  New 
York,  Maryland,  Pennsylvania,  and  Virginia,  as  well  as  pos- 
sibilities for  producing  resin,  hemp,  flax,  and  saltpetre. ^^^ 
The  Assembly  of  Maryland  stated  several  times  that  if  due 
notice  were  given  the  province  was  capable  of  furnishing 
in  large  quantities  masts  of  all  kinds,  yards,  bowsprits,  tar, 
knees,  pipe  staves,  and  barrel  staves.^®*  In  1695  an  address 
to  the  same  effect  was  sent  to  England,  and  Nicholson  added 

ISO  Archives,  vol.  ii,  p.  300;  vol.  vii,  p.  325;  vol.  xiii,  p.  222. 

181  See  Lord,  p.  56  fif.,  for  discussion  of  the  question  of  the  need 
of  England  for  naval  stores  from  the  colonies. 

182  Lord,  p.  9  ff. 

1S3  Treasury    Papers,    xvi,    20.     Randolph    also    presented   to    the 
Board  of  Trade  a  paper  on  naval  stores  (C.  O.  323:  2,  4). 
184  Archives,  vol.  xix,  pp.  80,  541. 


54  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [496 

in  a  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Shrewsbury  that  it  was  a  pity  that 
"  either  his  Majesty,  or  the  people  of  England,  that  want 
them,  should  have  so  little  Benefit  from  Such  vast  quantities 
as  these  Countreys  affoard."^^^  In  1704  a  proposal  was 
made  to  Governor  Seymour  by  one  Andrew  Tonnard,  a 
shipwright  from  Deptford,  that  sawyers  should  be  sent  for 
from  England  and  shipyards  be  erected  in  Maryland  to  build 
fourth-rate  ships  for  the  navy,  and  so  utilize  the  vast  stores 
of  timber  in  the  province. ^^^  As  hemp  for  cordage  and  pitch 
and  tar  could  also  be  easily  obtained  in  Maryland,  it  would 
be  a  most  suitable  place  for  the  erection  of  such  a  yard. 
Nothing  ever  came  of  this  elaborate  proposal,  although  Gov- 
ernor Seymour  recognized  the  advantages  of  the  province 
for  the  production  of  naval  stores.  The  lower  Eastern 
Shore  was,  he  declared,  most  suitable  for  making  tar  and 
pitch. ^^^  He  thought  that  many  of  the  inhabitants  had  old 
fields  worn  out  with  tobacco  which  might  prove  good  for 
hemp.  "  Masts,  Yards,  and  Bowspritts  will  at  present, 
while  the  fl:reight  of  Tobacco  goes  so  high  (tho'  enough  to 
be  had  here)  be  only  Supplyd  from  New  England  etc  the 
usuall  places  where  the  Shipps  go  to  fifetch  them.  Many 
people  are  Aiming  at  Rozin,  Pitch,  Tarr,  and  Turpentine, 
and  believe  wull  send  home  some  Pitch  this  Shipping,  But 
tho'  we  have  in  many  places  great  Quantity s  of  Pines  that 
will  afford  all  these,  yet  for  want  of  Skill  in  the  Tapping, 
Drawing  off,  and  otherwise  Burning  the  Tarr  kilns,  it  is 
Complaind  of  to  be  too  hott  for  the  Ropes,  which  might  be 
easily  Corrected  by  art."^^^ 

185  C.  O.  5:  719,  18,  Bundle  3,  1695. 

186  C.  O.  5:  715,  79,  Bundle  1704,  F.  3. 

187  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  14. 

188  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  22.  Gerard  Slye,  however,  who  offered  to 
supply  England  with  naval  stores  from  Maryland,  differed  from 
Governor  Seymour  in  his  conception  of  the  kinds  of  stores  most 
easily  furnished  by  Maryland :  "  Virginia  and  Maryland  can  Supply 
their  Majesties  with  Pitch,  Tar,  and  deal  Plank  but  New  England 
much  better  because  of  the  Infinite  number  of  Pine  trees  that  Coun- 
try affords,  tho'  masts  and  bolesprites  Virginia  and  Maryland  can 
supply  with  better  then  New  England  the  Land  being  richer  the 
trees  are  much  bigger  and  taller  and  the  rivers  more  convenient  to 


497]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND    CHIEF    EXPORTS  55 

The  province,  then,  was  suited  for  the  production  of  naval 
stores,  and  in  spite  of  possible  difficulties  in  securing  skilled 
labor,^®^  the  governors  thought  that  all  that  was  really  needed 
was  systematic  encouragement  from  England.  This  would 
best  be  given  if  the  colonists  could  be  assured  of  a  steady 
demand  in  the  home  country  for  colonial  naval  stores^''"  and 
if  they  could  be  taught  by  Englishmen  the  methods  of  pre- 
paring the  commodities  for  the  home  market.^^^  When  the 
attention  of  the  English  government  was  called  to  the  situa- 
tion, it  was  willing  to  protect  the  production  of  naval  stores 
provided  this  would  not  interfere  with  tobacco  raising. 
"Tho'  the  Encouragement  of  the  Production  of  Naval  Stores 
in  the  Plantations  being  of  the  highest  Importance  to  Eng- 
land, yet  it  is  not  fitting  to  be  encouraged  in  those  Places 
which  are  proper  for  the  Production  of  Tobacco,  and  there- 
fore you  will  take  care  therein ;  but  that  the  Production  of 
Naval  Stores  may  be  in  such  parts  of  your  Governm*^  as  are 
only  proper  for  them."^^-  Several  efforts  were  made  to 
give  such  systematic  encouragement,^^^  and  the  law  concern- 
ing naval  stores  in  the  colonies^^*  was  of  course  sent  to  Alary- 
land,  where  Governor  Seymour  expressed  his  hope  that  it 
would  be  favorably  received  by  the  people  and  would  result 
in  an  increase  of  production  in  that  colony.^'^^  The  province 
itself  had  already  made  laws  encouraging  the  growing  of 
hemp   and   flax    for   naval   stores,   and   after   considerable 

take  them  in,  and  for  the  rest  of  the  Species  the  land  will  produce 
the  best  of  Hemp  and  theres  Oak  enough,  and  if  the  charge  of 
bringing  it  for  England  be  thought  too  great,  if  men  of  War  be 
order'd  to  be  built  there  that  charge  will  be  saved  and  they  may  be 
built  for  half  the  charge  that  they  are  built  for  in  England;  and  if 
incouragement  be  given  Trades-men  nor  labourers  will  not  be  want- 
ing "  (Letter  from  Gerard  Slye  to  Mr.  Povey  at  Whitehall,  March 
20,  1693/4,  in  C.  O.  323-  I,  82). 

189  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  541. 

190  Treasury  Papers,  xvi,  20. 

191  C.  O.  5:  719,  18;  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  22. 

19-  C.  O.  5 :  726,  p.  429,  Letter  from  the  Board  of  Trade  to  Gov- 
ernor Sevmour,  March  26,  1707;  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  14. 

193 c.  b.  5:  713,  117,  117  (i);  C.  O.  5:  1260,  76;  C.  O.  5:  71S, 
Bundle  1705,  G.  31.     See  also  quoted  comments  of  colonial  governors. 

19-*  3  &  4  Anne,  c.  9. 

195  C.  O.  S:  716,  H.  14,  H.  22. 


56  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [49^ 

effort,^^*'  in  1706  a  new  act  was  passed  in  response  to  the 
appeals  of  the  government  at  home  and  of  the  royal  ofificials 
in  the  colony.^''^  The  colonial  law  made  it  obligatory  for 
any  creditor  to  accept  good  hemp  and  flax  at  fixed  rates  in 
payment  of  one  fourth  part  of  any  debt. 

But  in  spite  of  the  planters'  assertions,  they  needed  more 
than  government  support  to  enable  them  to  send  large  quan- 
tities of  naval  stores  to  the  home  country.  Whatever  may 
have  been  the  reasons — and  probably  the  principal  one  was 
simply  the  preoccupation  of  the  colony  with  tobacco-raising 
— the  production  of  naval  stores  in  Maryland  was  more  or 
less  of  a  failure.  During  the  whole  period  of  royal  gov- 
ernment no  hemp  or  flax  was  exported  to  England,  and  the 
preparation  of  large  timber  for  the  navy  was  almost  equally 
unsuccessful.^^®  Only  the  smaller  kinds  of  wooden  prod- 
ucts, principally  pipe  and  barrel  staves,  were  exported  in 
any  appreciable  quantities,  and  that  not  until  after  the  begin- 
ning of  the  century.  In  171 5  Maryland  and  Virginia 
together  exported  about  3610  hundred  pipe  staves  and  11 15 
hundred  barrel  staves  to  England.  In  the  same  year  189 
last  (12  barrels)  of  tar  and  pitch  were  sent  over  from  the 
two  colonies,  but  Maryland's  proportion  is  uncertain.  Even 
after  the  passage  of  the  English  bounty  law  of  1705  the 
exportation  of  any  variety  of  naval  stores  increased  but 
slowly. ^"^ 

The  value  of  these  exports  was  also,  of  course,  small.  In 
1694  Gerard  Slye  of  Maryland  was  willing  to  contract  for 
tar  delivered  in  the  province  at  £5.  4s.  per  last,  and  for  pitch 
at  £4.  1 6s.  per  ton,-°°  but  since  the  two  provinces  together 
never  exported  more  than  189  last  in  any  one  year  between 

^^^  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  149. 

^^^  Ibid.,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  632. 

^^®  It  has  been  possible  to  obtain  a  complete  account  of  the  naval 
stores  exported  from  Maryland  and  Virginia  between  1697  and 
1715  from  the  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and 
Exports,  vols,  i-xvii,  and  C.  O.  390:  8,  6.  These  accounts  are  printed 
in  full  in  Appendix  I  to  this  study. 

^^^  See  Appendix  I. 

200  c.  O.  323:  I,  82  (i). 


499]  STAPLE    PRODUCTS   AND   CHIEF    EXPORTS  5/ 

1689  and  1715,  the  value  to  Alaryland  of  the  pitch  and  tar 
trade  was  very  small.  Pipe  and  barrel  staves  were  really 
the  only  profitable  ventures  in  timber  exportation.  As  pipe 
staves  brought  about  15s.  per  hundred  in  the  colony,-°^  the 
profit  must  have  been  considerable. 

The  conclusions  of  this  chapter  on  the  staple  products  of 
Maryland  may  be  broadly  stated.  The  colonial  authorities 
never  succeeded  in  inducing  the  inhabitants  to  turn  their 
attention  to  exporting  furs  or  fish  or  food-stufifs,  and  the 
royal  governors  at  the  end  of  the  century  not  only  acquiesced 
in  the  natural  line  of  economic  development  in  the  colony, 
but  did  everything  in  their  power  to  foster  the  growth  of 
tobacco.  This  was  to  an  even  greater  extent  the  aim  of  the 
English  government,  which  the  colonial  governors  repre- 
sented, but  on  account  of  the  necessities  of  the  English  fleet 
the  home  authorities  were  forced  to  make  one  exception  to 
their  policy  in  the  encouragement  of  the  production  of  naval 
stores  in  Maryland  as  well  as  in  the  other  colonies, — an 
effort  that  proved  to  be  futile.  The  staple  commodity  of 
Maryland  was,  and  continued  to  be,  tobacco,  and  with  a  few 
minor  exceptions  it  was  tobacco  only  that  was  produced  in 
sufficiently  large  quantities  to  be  exported  to  England  or  to 
the  English  colonies. 

201  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports, 
vols,  i-xvii. 


CHAPTER  II 
Imports 

We  have  seen  that  the  staple  product  of  the  colony  of 
Maryland  was  tobacco,  and  that  almost  all  of  that  part  of 
the  crop  which  was  exported  had  to  be  sent  directly  to  Eng- 
land. It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  most  of  the  commodities 
imported  must  have  come  from  England,  and  must  have 
been  obtained  either  as  purchases  made  by  the  planters  from 
the  profits  of  their  sales  in  England  or  as  ventures  sent  over 
by  English  merchants,  to  be  sold  in  the  colony  for  a  return 
cargo  of  tobacco.  From  the  records  this  is  found  to  be  the 
case.  For  example,  traders  to  Virginia  and  Maryland  in 
1689  asserted  that  those  provinces  depended  on  them  wholly 
for  clothing  and  other  necessaries  from  England.^ 

This  natural  tendency  received  systematic  encouragement 
in  the  home  country.  English  statesmen,  who  had  at  first 
been  more  interested  in  the  colonies  as  sources  of  supply  for 
raw  materials,-  were  now  realizing  their  value  as  outlets  for 
home  manufactures.^  By  the  end  of  the  century  the  plant- 
ers of  Virginia  and  Maryland  were  pointedly  and  repeatedly 
enjoined  to  import  not  only  their  luxuries  but  practically 
all  their  necessities  from  the  home  country.  The  induce- 
ment afforded  by  the  natural  course  of  trade  and  the  added 
exhortations  of  the  authorities  amply  secured  the  desired 
result.  But  while  English  manufactures  constituted  by  far 
the  largest  and  most  important  class  of  imports  into  Mary- 

1  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  579.  The  Virginia  Council  stated  in 
1708  that  that  colony  traded  mostly  with  Great  Britain  for  manufac- 
tured goods  from  the  home  country  (C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25). 

2  Beer,  Origins,  p.  72. 

3  Harleian  MSS.  1238,  f.  2,  British  Museum.  See  also  Quary's 
statement  to  Lord  Godolphin  in  1706  that  the  tobacco  colonies  were 
a  market  for  English  manufactures  (C.  O.  5 :  3,  112). 

58 


50l]  IMPORTS  59 

land,  they  were  not  the  only  imports  from  British  sources, 
the  trade  being  further  swelled  by  the  importation  of  con- 
tinental and  Asiatic  goods  which,  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  Navigation  Acts,  had  for  the  most  part  to 
be  shipped  to  the  colonies  by  way  of  England  as  an  entrepot. 

An  idea  of  the  great  amount  and  variety  of  these  goods 
sent  to  Virginia  and  Maryland  during  the  period  of  royal 
government  may  be  gained  from  the  sample  list  of  English 
exports  to  those  colonies,  taken  from  the  Custom  House 
Accounts  for  1699,*  and  printed  in  Appendix  II  of  this  mon- 
ograph. Evidently  the  British  manufacturers  supplied  most 
of  the  necessities  of  colonial  life,  ranging  from  shovels,  soft 
soap,  and  candles  to  great  quantities  of  woollen  cloths  of 
qualities  good,  bad,  and  indifferent.  The  importation  of 
home  products  was  by  no  means  confined  to  stern  necessi- 
ties ;  it  included  chariots,  window-glass,  stitched  gloves, 
stays,  looking-glasses,  and  perukes.  Learning  was  supposed 
to  be  at  a  low  ebb  in  Maryland  at  the  end  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  yet  almost  every  fleet  brought  boxes  of  books, 
maps,  and  pictures.  In  1699  there  were  even  two  printing 
presses  and  letters  (presumably  type)  and  some  mathemat- 
ical instruments.  From  the  continent  and  from  the  far  east 
came  groceries  and  spices,  all  kinds  of  linens,  some  of  very 
handsome  quality  with  elaborate  eastern  names,  silks,  wines, 
drugs,  some  paper  fans,  and  toys  made  perhaps  in  Ger- 
many. It  must  indeed  have  been  true,  as  the  colonists 
said,  that  Virginia  and  Maryland  depended  almost  wholly  on 
England  for  their  clothing  as  well  as  for  many  other  necessi- 
ties of  life.^  Colonial  manufactures  could  not  have  been  of 
much  importance  when  such  large  quantities  of  woollen  and 
linen  goods,  of  coarse  as  well  as  fine  quality,  and  of  leather, 
hats,  and  wrought  iron  were  annually  imported. 

Such  lists  as  these  from  the  English  Custom  House  indicate 
that  the  colonists  had  passed  beyond  the  early  stages  of  their 

4  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports, 
vol.  iii. 

5  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  579- 


6o  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [502 

economic  life.  They  imported  only  small  quantities  of 
food-stuffs  from  England.  They  no  longer  wanted  only 
such  articles  as  were  needed  to  maintain  life  in  the  wilder- 
ness, the  coarser  sorts  of  clothing,  arms  and  ammunition, 
and  different  kinds  of  agricultural  implements.  These  com- 
modities continued  in  demand  of  course,  presumably  for  the 
use  of  the  smaller  planters,  servants  on  the  great  estates, 
and  frontier  settlers,  but  in  addition  planters  in  the  older 
settlements  were  demanding  a  greater  variety  of  products, 
including  the  luxuries  as  well  as  the  necessities  of  life.  The 
large  market  for  such  things  as  East  Indian  fabrics  presup- 
poses a  certain  degree  of  comfort  and  some  pretensions  to 
the  amenities  of  social  intercourse. 

With  the  increased  demand  for  greater  variety,  foreign 
articles  of  all  kinds  and  descriptions,  expensive  and  cheap, 
useful  and  ornamental,  were  widely  distributed  throughout 
the  province.  The  more  costly  imports  must  have  been  pro- 
cured from  England  or  purchased  from  incoming  vessels  by 
wealthy  planters  from  different  parts  of  the  provinces,  and 
stored  by  them  on  their  plantations  for  future  use.  A  colo- 
nist of  good  family  and  estate  in  almost  any  section  of  the 
province  would  leave  at  his  death,  besides  his  house,  live 
stock,  and  negroes,  large  quantities  of  imported  furniture, 
linen,  and  so  on.*'  For  example,  the  inventory  of  the  estate 
of  Madam  Henrietta  Maria  Lloyd  of  Talbot  County  on  the 
Eastern  Shore,'^  made  in  the  year  1697,  shows  that  she  died 
possessed  of  a  stock  of  furniture,  bedding,  linen,  woollen 
goods,  and  personal  clothing  which  would  not  be  scorned  by 
any  woman  of  the  present  day  living  far  from  a  large  city. 
Many  ells  of  English  canvas,  crocas,  dowlas,  ozenbrig,  and 
kersey  were  inventoried,  with  enough  pins,  needles,  thimbles, 
tape,  buttons,  and  so  on,  to  equip  a  modern  dressmaking 
establishment.     Many  varieties  of  farm  utensils  and  carpen- 

^  Collection  of  Inventories  and  Accounts  at  Land  Commissioner's 
Office  in  Annapolis,  Maryland. 

^  Inventories  and  Accounts,  vol.  15,  f.  198,  ff. 


503]  IMPORTS  61 

ters'  tools,  servants'  clothing,  coarse  woollen  goods,®  shoes, 
hats,  and  so  forth,  had  been  imported  by  her  and  formed 
considerable  assets  of  the  estate.  In  the  house  itself  were 
no  less  than  fifteen  beds  or  mattresses  (whether  bedsteads 
or  not  is  not  stated),  most  of  them  with  hangings  and  fur- 
nishings, eight  looking-glasses,  and  numerous  chairs,  chests 
of  drawers,  and  carpets.  Madam  Lloyd  had  accumulated  a 
stock  of  foreign  linen  amounting  to  twelve  table-cloths  of 
varying  qualities,  eight  dozen  and  three  napkins,  twenty-six 
pairs  of  sheets,  and  ten  pairs  of  pillow-cases.^  Her  own 
personal  clothing  was  evidently  handsome  and  adequate  to 
most  occasions :  she  rejoiced  in  the  possession  of  eleven 
gowns  and  petticoats,  some  of  them  of  silk  and  satin,  one 
mantle,  three  coats,  three  pairs  of  stays,  nine  pairs  of  shoes, 
five  pairs  of  silk  stockings,  and  four  headdresses,  besides 
many  smaller  articles  of  clothing  and  a  pearl  necklace,  not, 
however,  of  great  value.  Her  complete  outfit  was  worth 
£86.  15s.  6d.,  no  mean  sum  for  a  woman  of  her  day  exiled 
in  the  colonies.  Madam  Lloyd  was  clearly  a  great  lady,  and 
the  presence  in  the  colony  of  other  ladies  and  gentlemen 
of  similar  rank  explains  the  necessity  for  a  variety  and  a 
wide  distribution  of  British  and  foreign  manufactures.  This 
and  similar  inventories  of  estates  also  support  the  declara- 
tion of  Hugh  Jones,  quoted  in  Chapter  I,  that  some  planters 
had  gained  great  estates  by  tobacco  growing.  The  larger 
ones  at  least  were  evidently  not  so  poor  as  they  believed 
themselves  to  be. 


^  Most  of  the  coarse  woollen  goods  must  have  been  foreign  in 
origin,  because  it  was  evidently  carefully  stated  when  such  was  not 
the  case,  as  in  the  following  two  items  in  the  account:  "  1%  [yd.] 
of  this  Countrey  Cloth  is.  8d.  2  petty  Coates  2  Waste  coates  and 
2  pr  of  Draw"  of  this  Countrey  Cloth  £1.  os.  od."  (Inventories 
and  Accounts,  15,  f.  198). 

That  other  articles  mentioned  in  these  inventories  were  largely 
of  foreign  origin  seems  indicated  by  the  fact  that  they  are  nearly  all 
mentioned  in  the  Custom  House  Accounts  of  British  and  foreign 
manufactures  imported  to  Virginia  and  Maryland,  for  a  sample  list 
of  which  see  Appendix  II.  Of  most  of  these  articles,  moreover, 
there  is  no  record  whatever  of  local  manufacture. 

^  Or  "  pillowberes  "  as  they  seem  to  have  been  called  at  that  time. 


62  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [504 

It  was  not  only  the  wealthiest  classes  that  patronized  the 
English  merchants ;  less  important  families  as  well  made 
almost  exclusive  use  of  foreign  products.  More  modest 
estates  were  those  of  Major  Robert  King  of  Somerset 
County  and  Mr.  John  Hewitt,  minister  of  Stepney  parish, 
but  their  possessions  also  included  for  the  most  part  articles 
which  must  have  been  imported.  Major  King  left  an  estate 
valued  at  £629,  consisting  largely  of  imported  furniture, 
household  goods,  and  various  kinds  of  hardware. ^°  Mr. 
Hewitt  left  behind  him  a  library  worth  £12;  some  broad- 
cloth, serge,  dowlas,  holland,  and  other  materials ;  five 
feather  beds,  three  silver  spoons,  one  silver  cup,  one  pair  of 
silver  buckles,  three  pewter  porringers,  fourteen  pewter 
spoons,  and  a  pair  of  fringed  gloves. ^^  Probably  all  these 
articles  came  from  England. 

Even  the  inventories  of  poor  men's  estates  contained  such 
things  as  ozenbrigs,^-  iron  pots,  and  brass  kettles,^^  which 
were  probably  of  foreign  manufacture.  It  is  quite  clear, 
then,  that  the  British  and  foreign  manufactures  brought 
into  Maryland  were  varied  in  character  and  extent,  ranging 
all  the  way  from  expensive  luxuries  to  the  commonest  neces- 
sities of  life,  and  that  they  were  widely  distributed  through- 
out the  province. 

The  amount  and  value  of  the  goods  thus  imported  varied 
considerably  from  year  to  year.^*  The  total  for  Virginia 
and  Maryland  in  1699  was  £205,078.  os.  2i^d.,^^  but  this 
was  unusually  large,  the  average  being  about  £135,000.^^  Of 
this  amount  Maryland  probably  received  about  one  third,  the 
equivalent  of  her  share  of  the  exports  of  the  two  colonies. 

i<>  Inventories  and  Accounts,  19,  f.  62. 

"Ibid.,  16,  f.  219. 

12  Ibid.,  f.  60. 

"Ibid.,  f.  162. 

1^  The  imports  seem  to  bear  no  immediate  relation  to  the  exports. 
That  is,  a  small  tobacco  crop  sent  to  England  one  year  did  not  nec- 
essarily mean  a  proportionately  meagre  supply  of  manufactures  im- 
ported the  following  year. 

15  Add.  MSS.  29903,  f.  I,  British  Museum. 

16  Ibid.,  passim,  flf.  1-17.  The  average  is  computed  for  the  years 
from  1699  to  1715. 


505] 


IMPORTS 


63 


On  the  whole,  it  is  no  wonder  that  the  English  government 
was  anxious  that  this  trade  should  be  preserved. 

It  is  true  that  the  value  of  the  raw  materials  exported 
from  Virginia  and  Maryland — most  notably,  of  course, 
tobacco — generally  exceeded  the  value  of  the  English  and 
continental  imports/^  The  following  list  of  imports  and  ex- 
ports from  1699  to  171 5  will  show  this  clearly.  As  the  list 
is  from  an  English  source,  the  words  '  imports  '  and  '  exports ' 
used  in  the  list  are  to  be  reversed  when  applied  to  the  colo- 
nies. The  figures  show  an  excess  of  imports  into  England, 
that  is,  of  exports  from  America. 

The  Imports  and  Exports  compared  with  the  Excess  for  each 

Country 

For  Virginia  and  Maryland 


Excess 

Excess 

of 

of 

Year 

Imports 

Exports 

Imports 

Exports 

i. 

£. 

L 

£. 

1699 

198,11s 

205,078 

— 

6,962 

1700 

2'i^7,202 

173,481 

143,821 

— 

1 701 

235,738 

199,683 

36,055 

— 

1702 

274782 

72.391 

202,391 

— 

1703 

144,928 

196,713 

— 

51,785 

1704 

264,112 

60,458 

203,654 

1705 

116,768 

174,322 

— 

57,553 

1706 

149,152 

58,0x5 

91,136 

1707 

207,625 

237,901 

— 

30,275 

1708 

213,493 

79.061 

134,432 

1709 

261,668 

80,268 

181,400 

— 

I71O 

188,429 

127,639 

60,790 

— 

1711 

273,181 

91,435 

181,645 

— 

1712 

297,941 

134,583 

163,357 

— 

1713 

206,263 

76,304 

129,959 

— 

1714 

280,470 

128,873 

151,597 

— 

I715 

174,756 

199,274 

24,518^ 

The  principal  export  of  the  two  colonies,  however,  paid 
heavy  customs  duties  to  the  government,  and  much  of  it  also 
was  reexported  to  the  Continent  in  manufactured  form.     So 


"  Sloane  MSS.  2902,  f.  171,  British  Museum,  Report  of  the  Lords 
of  Trade  and  Plantations  on  the  State  of  Trade  in  England. 

18  Add.  MSS.  29903,  ff.  1-17,  British  Museum.  These  figures  have 
been  compared  with  the  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Im- 
ports and  Exports,  and  with  one  or  two  unimportant  exceptions 
have  been  found  to  correspond  exactly. 


64  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [506 

even  the  mercantilist  writers  thought  that  the  trade  was  en- 
riching the  kingdom,  and  laid  no  emphasis  on  the  fact  that 
the  actual  balance  was  against  England.^^ 

In  Maryland  there  was  not  so  much  satisfaction  mani- 
fested at  the  state  of  the  trade.  The  amount  of  tobacco  ex- 
ported to  England  varied  largely  from  year  to  year.  The  Eng- 
lish merchants  naturally  were  loath  to  import  into  Maryland 
and  Virginia  large  quantities  of  British  and  foreign  manufac- 
tures which  in  the  event  of  a  bad  harvest  might  be  left  on 
their  hands.-*'  As  there  was  no  foreign  competition,  the 
merchants  had  the  colonists  completely  at  their  mercy, 
and  even  in  average  years  the  supply  of  goods  imported 
seems  to  have  been  barely  adequate  to  meet  the  needs  of 
the  inhabitants.  At  times  it  certainly  fell  far  below  the 
average  requisite  amount.  In  the  bad  years  complaints  were 
frequent  from  both  colonies  that  they  were  entirely  depend- 
ent on  these  English  imports,  that  the  quantity  they  were 
receiving  did  not  suffice  to  supply  their  needs,  and  that  the 
dearth  of  manufactures  was  causing  great  distress  in  the 
country.  In  1704,  for  instance,  a  scarcity  of  goods  was  re- 
ported.-^ The  next  year  it  was  asserted  in  Virginia  that, 
"  the  quantity  of  Goods  and  especially  of  Cloathing  imported 
of  late,  not  being  sufficient  for  supplying  the  Country,  Many 
of  the  Inhabitants,  .  .  .  have  this  last  year,  planted  a  consider- 
able quantity  of  Cotton. "^^  Governor  Jennings  of  Virginia 
said  in  1714  that  the  planters  were  "in  the  most  want  of 
Cloaths  and  the  fewest  Goods  in  the  Country  that  I  ever 
knew,"-^and  Governor  Seymour  of  Maryland  stated  the  whole 
case  quite  clearly  to  the  Board  of  Trade,  representing  to  them 
what  he  considered  to  be  the  pitiful  condition  of  the  planters. 


1^  J.  Gee,  The  Trade  and  Navigation  of  Great  Britain  Considered, 
6th  ed.,  p.  20.  In  spite  of  the  trade  balance  in  their  favor,  Virginia 
and  Maryland  received  very  Httle  actual  coin  from  England,  the  dif- 
ference probably  being  made  up  in  the  form  of  bills  of  exchange 
drawn  on  London  to  pay  for  slaves  and  goods  bought  from  other 
colonies. 

20  Bruce,  vol.  ii,  p.  336. 

21  C.  O.  5:  1314,  21. 

22  c.  O.  S:  1315,  N.  8. 

23  C.  O.  5  :  1315,  N.  89. 


507]  IMPORTS  65 

The  people,  said  Seymour,  "  being  in  debt  to  the  Merchants 
Consignees  in  England,  they  Send  them  little  or  no  goods  at 
all,  most  of  the  Shipps  comeing  from  London,  upon  freight, 
in  their  Ballast  with  their  provisions  only  for  the  Voyage, 
So  that  many  people  here  are  almost  starke  naked,  which 
has  occasioned  Some  to  turne  their  hands  to  manufacture  of 
Lynnen  and  Woollen,  and  if  your  Lordships  in  your  Wis- 
dome  do  not  find  out  Some  Expedient  to  have  the  Necessity 
of  the  Country  relieved,  by  obliging  the  Merchants  to  Send 
Supplys,  it  may  be  of  ill  Consequence  to  the  Revenue  arising 
on  tobacco,  which  will  be  in  greate  measure  layd  aside  by 
Sucji  who  find  they  can  have  nothing  for  it."-*  One  paper 
on  the  state  of  trade  in  Virginia  and  Maryland  in  1714  even 
went  so  far  as  to  assert,  with  considerable  exaggeration, 
that  the  importation  of  English  manufactures  to  those  colo- 
nies had  fallen  ofif  one  half  in  recent  years. -^  Clearly  the 
colonies  themselves  were  far  from  satisfied  with  the  con- 
dition of  their  trade  with  the  home  country,  and  their  sup- 
ply of  foreign  goods,  although  perhaps  large  enough  to 
please  the  authorities  at  home,  did  not  suffice  to  meet  colo- 
nial demands. 

The  colonial  governors  did  not  confine  themselves  to 
pleading  the  pitiful  condition  of  the  inhabitants.  They  went 
on  to  show  that  in  their  opinion  this  inadequate  supply  of 
goods  would  drive  the  colonists  to  manufacturing  on  their 
own  account.  Governor  Nicholson  warned  the  Lords  of 
Trade  in  1695  that  if  ships  did  not  come  from  England  "to 
fetch  the  Tobaccos,  and  bring  a  good  quantitie  of  linnen  and 
woolen,  working  Tools,  and  other  necessarys,  it  may  put 
the  people  upon  cloathing  themselves,"  but  he  said  that  if 
enough  ships  came  with  suitable  cargo,  "  the  planters  will 
mind  nothing  but  planting,  and  leave  of  other  projects."-® 

24  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  41.  The  same  reference  is  to  be  found  in  Ar- 
chives, vol.  XXV.  p.  266.     See  also  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  22,  H.  74. 

25  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  160. 

2^  C.  O.  5:  724,  p.  198.     Nicholson  makes  a  somewhat  similar  state- 
ment in  a  letter  to  the  secretary  of  state  (C.  O.  5:  719,  18,  Bundle 
3).     Cf.   also    Sir  Thomas   Lawrence's   memorial   to   the   Lords   of 
Trade,  1695  (C.  O.  5:  7i3,  nS)- 
5 


66  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [508 

The  Virginians  blamed  the  low  price  of  tobacco  for  the  lack 
of  clothing,  a  lack  which  had  "  put  them  upon  making  diverse 
Manufactures  themselves.""  If  the  colonists  were  not 
clothed  by  English  manufactures,  they  would  learn  to  clothe 
themselves,  and  the  demand  for  those  English  manufactures 
would  soon  cease  entirely.  That,  at  least,  was  the  argument 
of  the  colonial  governors. 

Letters  like  these  evidently  lessened  the  satisfaction  of 
English  statesmen  with  the  condition  of  the  trade  with 
the  tobacco  colonies  at  the  end  of  the  century.  That  the 
colonists  might  take  to  manufacturing  and  therefore  com- 
pete with  English  goods  was  a  most  disconcerting  suggestion. 
What  a  calamity  it  would  be  should  Virginia  and  Maryland 
no  longer  provide  an  annual  market  for  home  and  foreign 
products!  The  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  moved  the 
disallowance  of  the  Act  for  Ports  in  Maryland,  on  the  ground 
that  it  would  encourage  manufacturing  and  prevent  the  due 
cultivation  of  tobacco.-^  The  Board  of  Trade  told  the 
Maryland  authorities  that  all  manufactured  articles  ought 
to  be  sent  from  England.-'^  It  asked  them  where  the  people 
now  got  those  manufactures  with  which  the  home  country 
had  formerly  supplied  them.^°  It  promised  to  try  to  induce 
the  merchants  to  send  over  enough  to  supply  the  colony 
at  a  reasonable  rate.^^  When  Governor  Seymour  complained 
that  the  importations  were  not  large  enough  to  answer  the 
needs  of  his  province,  he  was  told  that  the  merchants  had 
been  informed  of  his  complaint  and  that  the  matter  would 
doubtless  be  remedied,  a  statement  repeated  in  1708.^-  As 
a  matter  of  fact  these  hopes  for  an  adequate  supply  were 
not  realized  during  the  period  of  royal  control  in  Maryland. 
Nevertheless,  according  to  the  English  point  of  view,  Eng- 
lish imports  must  be  protected  even  at  the  cost  of  colonial 

27Egerton  MSS.  921,  f.  9,  British  Museum,  The  State  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Trade,  by  Arthur  Bayley,  1708. 

28  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  44- 

29  C.  O.  5:  727,  P-  112. 

30  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  500;  C.  O.  5 :  ^26,  p.  437. 

31  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  350. 

32  C.  O.  S:  726,  p.  472;  C.  O.  5:  1^7,  P-  112. 


509]  IMPORTS  ^y 

interests.  The  merchants  were  to  be  urged  to  supply  the 
demand,  but  even  if  they  refused  to  do  so  the  colonists  were 
not  to  be  allowed  to  manufacture  for  themselves,  lest  ulti- 
mately the  market  for  English  goods  should  be  lost. 

What  meantime  was  the  attitude  in  Maryland  toward 
colonial  manufactures?  Had  the  colonial  officials  always 
consistently  supported  the  British  government  in  the  attempt 
to  forbid  the  development  of  colonial  industry  to  meet  colo- 
nial needs,  or  had  their  point  of  view  changed  with  the 
arrival  of  the  royal  governors?  How  much  inclined,  also, 
had  the  province  ever  been  to  develop  any  real  manufactur- 
ing on  its  own  account?  It  may  be  said  in  answer  to  the 
first  of  these  questions  that  while  the  proprietary  govern- 
ment was  in  control  in  Maryland  there  was  certainly  no 
official  discouragement  of  manufacturing  on  the  part  of  the 
representatives  of  the  proprietor,  and  little  attention  was 
paid  to  the  opposition  of  England.  Indeed,  as  in  Vir- 
ginia,^" the  colonial  government  was  not  averse  to  direct 
encouragement  of  home  production.  As  early  as  1662  an 
ordinance  prohibiting  the  exportation  of  untanned  leather 
was  issued  by  the  governor  and  Council  for  the  encourage- 
ment of  tanners,^*  and  a  statute  to  the  same  effect  was 
passed  in  1681.^^  In  1682  Maryland  and  Virginia  both 
passed  laws  encouraging  the  making  of  linen  and  woollen 
cloth.^^  The  Maryland  act  was  renewed  in  1688  at  the 
instance  of  the  Upper  House  of  xA.ssembly.^^  This  house 
also  asked  for  a  grand  committee  to  debate  the  question  of 
promoting  husbandry,  the  sowing  of  hemp  and  flax,  the 
encouraging  of  the  making  of  linen  and  woollen,  and  the 
encouraging  of  tradesmen  to  inhabit  towns  and  carry  on 
manufactures.^^  The  policy  of  the  colonial  authorities  dur- 
ing the  proprietary  period  must  therefore  have  been  directly 

23  Bruce,  vol.  ii,  pp.  457-458. 

34  Archives,  vol.  iii,  p.  457. 

35  Ibid.,  vol.  vii,  p.  206. 

36  Ibid.,  p.  324;  Hening,  vol.  ii,  p.  503. 

37  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  220. 

38  Ibid.,  p.  169. 


68  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [5  lO 

Opposed  to  that  of  the  home  government.  They  considered 
that  certain  forms  of  industry  would  be  distinctly  benefi- 
cial to  the  colony,  and  did  what  they  could  to  foster  their 
development. 

Enough  has  already  been  said  to  show  that  when  the  royal 
governors  came  to  Maryland  the  policy  of  the  executive  fell 
into  line  with  that  of  England.  The  governors  told  the  in- 
habitants of  the  English  objections  to  colonial  manufactur- 
ing, informed  the  home  government  of  the  exact  progress 
of  different  industries  from  year  to  year,  and  aroused  the 
fears  of  merchants  and  manufacturers  that  colonial  goods 
might  at  no  far  distant  date  compete  with  their  own  importa- 
tions."'-' Apparently  the  Maryland  Assembly  followed  the 
royal  policy  with  reluctance,  for  at  least  one  definite  attempt 
to  pass  an  act  encouraging  the  planting  of  cotton,  flax,  and 
hemp  was  checked  by  the  governor.*'^  On  the  whole,  how- 
ever, the  attitude  of  the  executive  forced  the  colonial  gov- 
ernment to  support  the  home  authorities,  and  prevented  any 
legislation  encouraging  Maryland  industries. 

The  second  question  with  respect  to  the  colonial  attitude 
toward  domestic  manufactures  remains  to  be  answered. 
How  far  was  Maryland  at  this  time  naturally  inclined  to 
develop  home  industries?  Did  the  discouraging  prohibi- 
tions of  the  British  government  and  of  the  colonial  authori- 
ties under  its  control  really  crush  any  incipient  manufactures 
which  might  have  increased  the  prosperity  of  the  colony? 
Contemporary  testimony  all  goes  to  show  that  Maryland 
had  practically  no  incipient  industries  which,  even  if  not 
interfered  with,  could  have  reached  any  considerable  propor- 

39  See  Seymour's  letter  to  England  quoted  above.  Other  letters 
from  the  dififerent  governors  express  similar  fears. 

40  C.  O.  5:  713,  115;  C.  O.  5:  1314,  M.  62.  Virginia  had  passed 
two  sets  of  acts  for  the  encouragement  of  manufactures,  one  estab- 
lishing a  premium  on  hemp,  flax,  or  manufactured  articles,  and  the 
other  making  these  commodities  legal  tender  for  debt.  The  pre- 
mium law  was  not  in  force  between  1684  and  1693,  nor  after  1699, 
and  the  debt  act  during  only  part  of  this  period  (Henmg,  vol.  11, 
PP-  503,  506;  vol.  iii,  pp.  16,  30,  50,  121).  See  also  on  the  Virginia 
policy  C.  O.  S:  713,  iiS,  and  Colonel  Jenning's  statement  that  Vir- 
ginia encouraged  manufactures  (C.  O.  5-  1316,  O.  7)- 


5ll]  IMPORTS  69 

tions.  In  fact,  both  Virginia  and  Maryland  were  agricul- 
tural communities,  primarily  interested  in  the  cultivation  of 
their  one  staple,  and  they  turned  to  any  form  of  manufacture 
only  with  the  greatest  reluctance.  Governor  Nicholson's 
statement  in  1695  that  the  planters  cared  nothing  for  manu- 
facturing when  the  English  ships  brought  in  suitable  cargoes 
has  already  been  quoted.'*^  He  expressed  a  similar  opinion 
to  the  secretary  of  state,  that  if  no  goods  came  the  planters 
might  clothe  themselves,  for  "  Necessity  hath  no  law,  and  is 
the  Mother  of  Invention."*-  The  same  paper  on  the  state  of  the 
tobacco  trade  which  commented  on  the  ill  effects  of  manufac- 
turing said  that  the  people  of  Maryland  and  Virginia  took  it 
up  "  out  of  Meere  Necessity."*^  Governor  Spotswood  of  Vir- 
ginia was  sure  also  that  the  colonists  there  manufactured 
more  from  necessity  than  from  inclination.**  A  representa- 
tion of  the  Virginia  Council  in  1713  complained  of  the  pitiful 
state  of  the  people,  and  said  that  some  of  them  had  already 
stopped  raising  tobacco  and  "  betake  themselves  to  Manu- 
factures of  Cotton,  flax  and  hemp,  which  they  would  never 
have  thought  of,  had  tobacco  but  yielded  them  a  living 
price."*^  Clearly  the  tobacco  colonies  would  manufacture 
for  themselves  only  when  literally  driven  to  it.  They  had 
discovered  long  before  this  that  their  economy  was  unfavor- 
able to  the  development  of  any  kind  of  manufacturing 
interests  on  a  large  scale,**'  and  that  at  almost  all  times,  in 

41  See  page  65. 

42  C.  O.  5  :  719,  18. 

43  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  75;  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25. 
**C.  O.  5:  13 16,  O.  88. 

«C.  O.  5.:  1316,0.  153. 

46  "In  this  province  [Maryland],  as  well  as  in  that  of  Virginia, 
the  planters  live  mostly  in  separate  situations  and  not  in  towns,  for 
the  convenience  of  the  great  number  of  rivers,  and  of  creeks  and 
in-lets  of  the  great  Bays  of  Chesapeak  and  Delawar,  whereby  they 
so  easily  convey  their  tobacco  to  the  ships :  so  that  in  neither  of 
those  colonies  are  there  as  yet  any  towns  of  considerable  bulk  or 
importance.  For  the  greater  planters  have  generally  storehouses 
within  themselves,  for  all  kinds  of  necessaries  brought  from  Great 
Britain,  not  only  for  their  own  consumption,  but  likewise  for  sup- 
plying the  lesser  planters  and  their  servants,  etc. —  And,  whilst  that 
kind  of  oeconomy  continues,  there  can  be  no  prospect  of  towns 
becoming  considerable  in  either  province;  which  is  so  far  a  benefit 


70  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [$12 

spite  of  temporary  scarcities  of  British  and  foreign  goods, 
it  was  on  the  whole  to  their  own  "  economic  advantage  to 
produce  tobacco,  to  sell  it  in  England,  and  out  of  its  pro- 
ceeds to  buy  English  manufactures."^" 

Naturally  this  does  not  mean  that  there  was  no  manu- 
facturing of  any  kind  in  the  colony.**  Thrifty  housekeepers 
made  coarse  cloth  to  clothe  their  families,  occasionally  a  ven- 
turesome inhabitant  attempted  to  produce  primitive  articles 
of  home  manufacture  for  sale,  and  one  or  two  small  indus- 
tries were  developed  in  connection  with  the  tobacco  trade. 
Coopers  and  carpenters  flourished  in  Maryland  and  Virginia 
where  there  was  most  need  for  their  trades,*''  but  the  absence 
in  the  records  of  any  mention  of  other  kinds  of  artificers 
makes  it  probable  that  they  were  few  in  number. 

Aside  from  carpentry,  the  most  considerable  activity  of 
the  inhabitants  was  that  of  spinning  and  weaving  small 
amounts  of  wool,  flax,  or  cotton  for  clothing,  especially  in 
the  years  when  English  imports  were  scarce.  Such  activity 
naturally  developed  on  the  individual  plantations  and  not  in 
any  centre.  The  purely  domestic  form  which  this  industry 
took  is  best  shown  by  different  reports  from  the  colonies. 
Colonel  Nott  of  Virginia  wrote  home  that  "  Many  of  the 
Inhabitants,  and  more  particularly  in  the  Countys  where  they 
plant  Aronoco  tobacco,  have  this  last  year,  planted  a  con- 
siderable quantity  of  Cotton,  which  they  have  manufactured 
with  their  wooll,  for  cloathing  their  familys,  and  others  have 
sowed  Flax,  and  made  Linnen."^°     The  Council  of  Mary- 

to  their  mother  country,  as  without  towns,  wherein  home  manu- 
factures and  handicrafts  are  generally  first  propagated,  they  must 
continue  to  be  supphed  from  Britain  with  cloathing,  furniture,  tools, 
dehcacies,  etc."  (A.  Anderson,  An  Historical  and  Chronological  De- 
duction of  the  Origin  of  Commerce,  Dublin,  1790,  vol.  ii,  p.  46/). 

^'^  G.  L.  Beer,  "  The  Commercial  Policy  of  England  toward  the 
American  Colonies,''  in  Columbia  University  Studies,  vol.  iii,  no. 
2,  p.  70. 

48  An  answer  to  queries  of  the  Board  of  Trade  stated  that  only 
about  one  sixtieth  of  the  inhabitants  of  Maryland  did  not  plant 
tobacco  (Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  54o)- 

4^  See  laws  on  coopers  and  gage  of  tobacco  hogsheads  in  Mary- 
land Assembly  Records. 

50  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  8. 


513]  IMPORTS  71 

land  told  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1697  that  the  colony  had 
no  general  supply  of  woollen  manufactures  except  from 
England,  although  necessity  had  taught  some  of  the  inhabi- 
tants to  use  the  native  wool  of  the  province  for  coarse 
stockings  and  clothing  for  servants  and  slaves.^^  Governor 
Seymour  reported  that  "  Pinching  Want  has  put  some  few 
on  making  of  a  little  Linnen  and  Woolen  but  not  sufficient 
to  Supply  their  owne  familys.""  In  1713  the  Council  of 
Maryland  petitioned  the  Board  of  Trade  for  relief  from  pov- 
erty, and  affirmed  that  "  had  not  many  people  Applyed  them- 
selves to  Spinning  the  little  wool!  their  Small  fflocks  of 
Sheep  afford,  and  likewise  some  Small  Quantitys  of  Flax, 
they  would  have  Suffered  very  much  for  want  of  Necessary 
Cloathing,  which  too  many,  not  So  carefull,  and  Industrious 
have  wofuUy  Experienced."^^ 

Even  this  domestic  form  of  manufacture,  though  it  caused 
the  English  officials  such  needless  apprehension,  was  con- 
fined almost  entirely  to  the  Eastern  Shore.  Hugh  Jones 
wrote  to  England  in  1698  that  "  We  have  little  or  no  woollen 
or  Linnen  manufactures  .  .  .  (Except  what  is  done  in  Somer- 
sett  County  over  the  Bay)  because  we  are  yearly  Supplied 
from  England  w^^  necessaries."^*  Governor  Nicholson  stated 
that  "  Somerset  County  in  this  province  (into  which,  about 
10  or  II  year  past  came  6  or  700  of  ye  Scotch-Irish  from 
Ireland)  doth  allredy  well  nigh  cloath  ymselves,  and  others: 
and  ye  next  County  learns  of  ym."^^  Thus  it  was  practically 
only  in  the  places  farthest  removed  from  the  British  sources 
of  supply  that  cloth-making  developed  to  any  marked  ex- 
tent, and  even  there  it  was  of  such  small  proportions  and  so 
purely  domestic  that  the  English  Wool  Act  of  1699'^''  had 
no  eft"ect  upon  it. 

^1  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  540. 

52  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  74. 

53  C.  O.  S:  717,  I-  75- 

54  Royal  Society,  Letter  Book,  I,  i,  183. 

55  C.  O.  5:  714,  25  (iii) ;  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  74;  Archives,  vol.  xix, 

P-  542. 

56  ID  William  III,  c.  16. 


72  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [SM 

The  only  other  industry  which  was  large  enough  to  find  a 
place  in  the  records  of  the  period  was  that  of  tanning  leather 
and  making  shoes.  The  exportation  of  untanned  leather 
was  prohibited  by  ordinance  in  1662  and  by  statute  in  1681, 
1692,  and  1712.-'^'  An  attempt  was  made  in  1695  to  improve 
the  quality  of  leather  tanned  in  the  province,  but  apparently 
nothing  was  accomplished.''^  Aside  from  these  laws,  state- 
ments with  regard  to  the  making  of  shoes  are  rare.  In  the 
session  of  1695  the  Lower  House  of  Assembly  thought  it  ad- 
visable that  tanners  be  obliged  to  make  shoes  of  a  certain 
amount  of  durability.^''  Governor  Seymour  at  one  time  re- 
marked, "  As  to  Manufactures  here  they  are  inconsiderable 
Shoes  being  the  Chief  est,  and  those  not  to  be  had  but  at  farr 
dearer  rates  then  from  Great  Brittaine."*^^  Tanning  and 
shoemaking  and  the  manufacture  of  linens  and  woollens 
were  the  only  industries  considered  worthy  of  mention  by  Gov- 
ernor Andros  of  Virginia.^^  Since  these  are  the  only  refer- 
ences on  the  subject  during  the  period  of  royal  government 
in  Maryland,  it  is  evident  that  the  inhabitants  preferred  on 
the  whole  to  import  their  shoes  as  well  as  other  manufac- 
tured articles  from  England. 

As  early  as  1720  Governor  Hart  of  Maryland  reported 
that  there  was  a  great  quantity  of  iron  ore  in  the  province 
but  that  it  was  not  worked  for  want  of  skilled  labor."-  The 
development  of  the  iron  mines  at  the  head  of  Chesapeake 
Bay  was  begun  about  ten  years  after  this  date.''^  The  in- 
dustry was  exploited  by  a  company  of  English  merchants 
who  sent  over  managers  and  set  up  a  forge  at  Principio. 
This  company  seems  to  have  made  little  money  at  first, 
although  mention  is  made  in  a  letter  of  sixteen  tons  of  pig 

5''' Archives,  vol.  iii,  p.  457;  vol.  vii,  p.  206;  vol.  xiii,  p.  496.  The 
act  of  1692  expired  in  169S,  and  there  was  no  further  legislation  on 
the  subject  until  1712  (ibid.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  191). 

58  Ibid.,  vol.  xix,  p.  183. 

59  Ibid. 

60  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  74- 

61  C.  O.  5  :  1309.  24. 

62  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  106. 

63  Papers  Relating  to  America,  Carew  Papers,  1725-177S,  in  Add. 
MSS.  29600,  British  Museum. 


515]  IMPORTS  73 

iron  shipped  on  one  vessel;  in  1736  the  company  evidently 
feared  competition  from  some  new  mines  on  the  Patapsco 
which  had  already  secured  a  good  reputation  for  their  iron. 
The  detailed  history  of  this  industry  belongs  to  a  later 
time. 

During  the  period  of  royal  government,  moreover,  there 
is  not  a  single  record  of  the  export  from  Maryland  of  articles 
of  native  manufacture.*''*  It  is  clear  that  in  this  period  the 
colony  developed  no  industries  either  for  home  use  or  for 
export  that  could  cause  any  immediate  anxiety  even  to  the 
most  zealous  royal  governor. 

Before  passing  to  the  discussion  of  minor  imports  it  seems 
necessary  to  mention  another  problem  to  which  the  trade  in 
British  imports  gave  rise.  Although  the  occasional  scarcity 
of  British  manufactures  and  of  European  goods  and  the  con- 
sequent suffering  of  the  people  did  not  tempt  the  inhabitants 
to  manufacture  for  themselves,  they  gave  rise  to  an  acrimoni- 
ous controversy  with  Pennsylvania  over  the  subject  of 
European  goods  which  increased  the  already  strained  rela- 
tions with  that  colony.  The  Maryland  government  thought 
that  it  was  bound  to  keep  all  imported  foreign  commodities 
in  the  province.  Consequently  every  precaution  was  taken 
to  prevent  the  reexportation  of  European  goods.  The  prin- 
cipal offenders  against  this  policy  were  the  merchants  of 
Pennsylvania,  who  imported  considerable  amounts  of  foreign 
goods  through  Maryland  and  so  lessened  the  quantity  of 
such  articles  remaining  to  be  sold  in  the  latter  colony."'^  The 
bill  passed  by  the  Maryland  Assembly  in  1695  imposing  a 
duty  of  ten  per  cent  on  all  European  goods  exported  from 
the  province  was  particularly  meant  to  affect  the  Pennsyl- 
vania traders,  as  Virginians  seem  to  have  been  exempted 
from  the  law.^^     William  Penn,  who  naturally  resented  this 

•5*  This  statement  is  based  on  the  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports 
from  the  Custom  House  Accounts.  The  only  possible  exception  to 
the  general  statement  is  the  record  of  the  export  of  a  few  hats  from 
Virginia  or  Maryland  to  England.  These  may  have  been,  but  more 
probably  were  not,  of  native  manufacture. 

65  C.  O.  5:  I2S7,  6  (xi). 

66  Archives,  vol.  xix,  pp.  238,  487. 


74  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [516 

discrimination  against  his  colony,  protested  to  the  Board  of 
Trade  that  the  duty  was  imposed  even  on  goods  consigned 
through  to  Pennsylvania,  his  merchants  thus  being  denied 
the  "  freedome  of  the  Kings  highways.""^  The  merchants 
complained  even  more  bitterly  to  Governor  Nicholson  be- 
cause articles  consigned  to  them  had  been  held  in  Maryland 
to  pay  the  duty.^^  The  Maryland  Assembly,  evidently  act- 
ing upon  the  theory  that  the  law  was  intended  to  apply  to 
just  such  cases,  refused  to  allow  the  goods  to  pass.*^''  Upon 
this  decision  a  Pennsylvanian  wrote  to  William  Penn :  "  Its 
not  strange  if  Maryland  endeavours  the  Subverting  yo*" 
Gov®''mt  since  they  Soe  Publiqly  show  their  disaffection  to 
the  Place  by  laying  an  Imposition  of  lo  p  ct  upon  all  Euro- 
pian  Commodities  imported  through  their  Country  Though 
a  Pennard  thereof  be  not  exposed  to  Sale  in  their  Province 
nor  a  Penny  benifit  rec'd  from  them."'*'  Penn  wrote  again  to 
the  Board  of  Trade  urging  that  Governor  Nicholson  should  be 
instructed  not  to  execute  the  law  in  Maryland,  and  implying 
that  he  knew  it  was  about  to  be  repealed  by  the  English  gov- 
ernment.'^^ Apparently  the  law  was  not  repealed,  however, 
and  the  Maryland  Assembly  in  1698  manifested  its  intention 
of  continuing  it  in  force.'-  Contrary  to  expectations  this 
measure  did  not  prevent  the  reexportation  of  European 
goods  to  neighboring  provinces,  but  it  did  secure  to  Maryland 
a  small  revenue  from  the  duty.  Sometimes  as  much  as  £400  or 
£500  was  collected  on  one  consignment,  and  these  consign- 
ments continued  to  go  for  the  most  part  to  Pennsylvania.'^^ 

67  C.  O.  323 :  2,  so. 

68  C.  O.  5:  1257,  6  (x). 

69  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  487. 

70  C.  O.  5  :  1257,  4. 

71  "  And  I  begg,  that  since  the  law  of  10  p  ct,  is  returned  to  ye 
Att.  Gen"  after  reported  injurious  to  Trade,  by  w""  means,  the 
ffleet  proceeding  in  few  days,  we  may  be  lyable  to  ye  great  oppres- 
sion in  Maryland,  It  would  please  the  Lords  to  Intimate  to  Gov"" 
Nicolson  that  he  forbear  yt  practice  upon  us,  because  the  law  will 
not  have  the  Kings  approbation  here"  (C.  O.  S:  1257,  3). 

72  Archives,  vol.  xxii,  p.  41 ;  C.  O.  5 :  741,  P-  497- 

73  An  Additional  Account  Taken  from  the  Originalls  from  the 
year  1695  to  1698,  in  C.  O.  5:  749.  Accounts  of  the  duty  on  re- 
exported European  goods  occur  more  frequently  in  the  lists  from 
Cecil  County,  which  would  indicate  that  it  was  to  Pennsylvania  that 
the  bulk  of  the  export  was  made. 


517]  IMPORTS  75 

It  may  have  been  because  the  law  was  not  accomphshing 
its  main  purpose  of  stopping  the  trade  that  a  new  act  concern- 
ing reexported  goods  was  passed  in  1706.^*  The  exportation 
of  European  goods  was  entirely  prohibited,  although  articles 
consigned  directly  to  Pennsylvania  as  well  as  those  con- 
signed to  Virginia  could  be  sent  through  the  province  with- 
out paying  duty.  Possibly  the  representations  of  Penn  and 
of  his  merchants  had  had  their  effect  on  the  Board  of  Trade 
and  Maryland  had  been  directed  to  change  her  law,  although 
no  such  instruction  from  England  has  been  preserved.'^^ 
This  measure  was  probably  directed  more  against  the  traders 
of  New  England  than  against  those  of  Pennsylvania.^** 
Their  course  of  trading  Governor  Seymour  described  as  very 
prejudicial  to  his  colony.  "And  our  diligent  Neighbours 
the  New  England  men,  against  which  this  Law  is  Leveled, 
for  ffish  Rum  and  Wooden  Ware  take  the  Oppourtunity  of 
purchasing  Considerable  Quantitys  of  our  Tobacco,  and 
leave  the  same  Ready  against  the  Outport  Vessells  come  in, 
(being  the  only  Trade  that  Supply  us  with  Goods,  now,  the 
London  Shipps  generally  coming  Empty)  to  purchase  whole 
Shipps  loadings,  which  they  immediately  Export  to  New  Eng- 
land, to  the  great  Disappointment,  and  Dissatisfaction,  of 
our  Gaping  Planters ;  The  merchants  being  willing  to  Deale 
where  they  can  purchase  their  full  Cargoe  rather  than  Strag- 
gling Hogsheads.""     Although  this  may  have  been  true,  the 

'^^  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  631. 

''^  At  this  time  the  Privy  Council  could  and  frequently  did  dis- 
allow laws  passed  by  the  Maryland  legislature,  as,  for  example,  the 
laws  for  the  establishment  of  the  church,  which  were  rejected  no 
less  than  three  times  (Privy  Council  Register,  76,  pp.  253,  254;  77, 
p.  396;  78,  p.  136).  The  Board  of  Trade,  therefore,  could  have 
brought  pressure  to  bear  on  the  colony  for  a  change  in  any  law  of 
which  it  did  not  approve. 

■^6  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  pp.  572,  573.  At  this  time  the  committee 
on  grievances  in  the  Lower  House  of  Assembly  considered  it  a 
grievance  that  the  Pennsylvania  traders  still  exported  from  Mary- 
land "  most  of  the  European  goods  imported  here."  The  House 
itself,  however,  considered  this  no  grievance,  so  the  state  of  affairs 
was  probably  much  exaggerated.  The  law  would  cover  all  goods 
reexported  to  Pennsylvania  unless  actually  consigned  from  England 
to  that  province. 

"  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  22, 


76  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [518 

Assembly  soon  found  that  the  embargo  did  not  so  much 
serve  to  keep  goods  in  the  country  as  to  hamper  the  trade 
with  England,  and  the  following  year  the  law  was  repealed. ^^ 
This  ended  all  legislative  attempts  to  prohibit  the  exporta- 
tion of  British  and  foreign  products  from  Maryland. 

Many  merchants  and  sea-captains  trading  in  the  province 
found  it  profitable  to  import  white  servants,  for  whom  there 
was  a  continuous  demand.  In  earlier  days  prospective  colo- 
nists themselves  imported  servants,  basing  their  claims  to 
land  on  the  number  brought  over  at  their  own  expense,  but 
this  practice  had  ceased.  The  transportation  of  white  serv- 
ants had  become  a  regular  business  between  planter  and 
merchant,'"  and  large  numbers  were  annually  imported  from 
England  and  Ireland.  A  discussion  of  the  total  number  of 
these  white  servants  in  the  colony,  their  proportion  to  the 
freemen  and  to  the  negroes,  their  economic  status,  and  so 
forth,  does  not  come  within  the  limits  of  this  paper.  In 
order,  however,  to  find  out  the  extent  of  Maryland's  import 
trade,  it  is  desirable  to  ascertain  if  possible  the  number  of 
servants  annually  imported  into  the  colony  and  the  conse- 
quent importance  of  this  branch  of  the  trade  with  England. 

It  is  well  known  that  from  the  first  settlement  of  Mary- 
land white  servant  labor  played  a  very  important  part  in  its 
development.  An  abundance  of  cheap  labor  was  absolutely 
necessary  to  cultivate  tobacco.  This  was  true  throughout 
the  seventeenth  century,  and,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  negroes 
were  beginning  to  be  imported  to  some  extent  from  Africa,^** 
white  servant  labor  was  still  the  primary  economic  factor  of 
plantation  life  during  the  period  of  royal  government.  It  is 
clear,  therefore,  that  the  importation  of  servants  was  an 

^s  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  39,  156.  The  governor  and  the  Council 
stated  that  "  the  Act  of  AssemlDly  against  the  Exportation  of  Euro- 
pean Goods  is  Experienced  since  the  short  Time  it  has  been  in  force, 
to  be  a  great  discouragement  to  the  Trade  of  Import,  which  is 
Diverted  thereby  from  this  Province  &  carryed  directly  to  other 
Ports.  Whereas  this  Country  would  be  the  Port  of  Trade  for  such 
Vessels  therefore  advise  it  be  repealed." 

■^^  E.  I.  McCormac,  "  White  Servitude  in  Maryland,"  in  Johns 
Hopkins  University  Studies,  vol.  xxii,  pp.  124-133. 

so  Ibid.,  p.  145. 


519]  IMPORTS  "jy 

essential  feature  oi  the  English  trade  to  the  tobacco  colo- 
nies. They  were  brought  over  in  various  ways,  either  sign- 
ing an  indenture  before  leaving  England,  or  being  trans- 
ported by  ship-captains  without  any  identure,  to  be  sold  to 
pay  for  their  passage  upon  reaching  the  colony.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  trade  was  a  prosperous  one,  but  it  has  proved 
almost  impossible  to  get  an  accurate  accoimt  of  its  extent  for 
more  than  one  or  two  years  between  1689  and  1715.  In 
1698  Governor  Nicholson  told  the  Board  of  Trade  that  the 
number  of  servants  imported  that  year  was  about  five  or  six 
hundred,  and  again  he  put  the  number  at  between  six  and 
seven  hundred.*^  A  compilation  of  scattered  figures  in  vari- 
ous revenue  lists  from  1696  to  1698  gives  the  figures  for 
white  servants  imported  into  the  province  as  follows :  1696, 
625  ;  1697,  353  ;  and  1698,  703.*-  It  is  possible  that  the  fig- 
ures for  1697  are  incomplete,  in  which  case  Nicholson's 
estimate  would  not  be  far  wrong.  In  1708  there  are  sup- 
posed to  have  been  three  thousand  and  three  servants  in 
Maryland.*^  If  they  came  in  under  a  four-year  indenture, 
this  would  mean  an  annual  importation  of  about  seven  hun- 
dred and  fifty;  if  the  agreement  was  for  five  years,  the 
number  would  be  nearer  six  hundred.  Probably  it  varied 
during  the  period  of  royal  government  somewhere  between 
these  two  figures.  Every  white  servant  brought  into  the 
country  sold  at  a  price  ranging  between  £15  and  £20,^*  which 
paid  the  cost  of  passage  and  must  also  have  given  a  consider- 
able commission  to  the  importer.  A  sufficient  number  of 
servants  was  annually  sold  in  Maryland  to  make  the  trade 
comparatively  profitable,  and  many  of  the  English  ships, 
especially  those  from  the  outports,  landed  white  servants  in 
the  province. 

Although  the  constant  importation  of  white  servants  of 
all  kinds  was  extremely  valuable  to  the  tobacco  planters, 

81  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  498;  C.  O.  S :  7i4,  47,  B.  35. 

82  These  figures  are  compiled  from  the  Naval  Office  Lists  for  1698 
(C.  O.  5:  749),  and  from  some  general  revenue  accounts  in  Mary- 
land to  be  found  principally  in  the  same  volume. 

83  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  258. 
**McCormac,  p.  154. 


78  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [S^O 

some  slight  attempt  was  made  to  regulate  their  quality  and 
even  to  restrict  their  number  in  the  larger  interests  of  the 
colony  itself.  The  presence  of  English  convicts  in  Maryland 
was  regarded  as  a  distinct  menace  to  colonial  welfare,  and 
as  early  as  1676  a  law  was  passed  forbidding  their  importa- 
tion as  servants. ^^  This  law,  although  renewed  in  1692,^° 
seems  to  have  been  ineffective,  largely  because  it  was  against 
the  policy  of  the  home  government.  In  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century  Maryland  certainly  received  large  num- 
bers of  convict  laborers."  In  1699  the  Protestant  govern- 
ment in  the  colony  viewed  with  disfavor  the  importation  of 
Irish  Catholic  servants  as  a  danger  to  the  new  Establishment, 
and  a  law  was  passed  laying  a  heavy  duty  on  all  such  serv- 
ants, "  to  prevent  too  great  a  number  of  Irish  Papists  in  the 
colony. "^^  This  law,  twice  renewed  under  Governor  Sey- 
mour,^^  an  especially  vigorous  supporter  of  the  Establish- 
ment and  opponent  of  Roman  Catholicism,  lessened  the 
number  of  Irish  servants  in  the  province,  but  did  not  entirely 
prevent  their  importation.^"  A  duty  was  also  levied  in  1696 
on  all  white  servants  imported;  but  its  object  was  not  to 
prohibit  the  trade,  but  to  secure  a  revenue  for  the  province.^^ 
On  the  whole,  the  efforts  to  regulate  the  character  of  serv- 
ants imported  were  but  sporadic  and  not  very  effective.  The 
number  of  laborers  received  was  apparently  not  seriously 
affected  by  any  adverse  legislation  during  the  twenty-five 
years  of  royal  government,  and  remained  pretty  constant 
throughout  the  period.  White  men  and  women  servants, 
therefore,  formed  a  continuous  if  a  minor  import  from  the 
home  country  to  the  colony. 

^^  Archives,  vol.  ii,  p.  540. 

®^  Ibid.,  vol.  xiii,  p.  539. 

^^  McCormac,  chapter  viii. 

^^  Archives,  vol.  xxii,  p.  497. 

^^  Ibid.,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  416;  vol.  xxvi,  p.  289;  vol.  xxvii,  p.  371. 

so  McCormac,  p.  142.  In  1708  Governor  Seymour  stated  to  the 
Board  of  Trade  that  few  white  servants  were  imported  from  England 
and  that  most  of  these  were  women,  while  several  men  as  well  as 
women  came  from  Ireland  (C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  74). 

^^  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  167. 


52 1]  IMPORTS  79 

The  most  important  product  of  foreign  countries  brought 
into  Maryland  was  the  negro.  Negroes  were  imported  in 
increasing  numbers  to  supply  the  demand  for  laborers  in 
the  tobacco  fields.  By  the  time  of  the  first  royal  govern- 
ors they  were  beginning  to  form  a  considerable  factor  in 
labor  conditions  in  the  colony,  although  they  were  compara- 
tively few  in  number  until  the  early  part  of  the  eighteenth 
century.^-  Most  of  the  negroes  at  this  time  seem  to  have 
been  brought  directly  from  the  Guinea  coast,  although  a  few 
came  from  the  West  Indies  or  the  neighboring  colonies.^^ 
The  amount  and  value  of  this  annual  importation  must  be 
considered.  In  the  spring  of  1698  Governor  Nicholson  re- 
ported that  there  were  expected  in  the  colony  that  summer 
between  four  and  five  hundred  negroes  f^  in  August  he  gave 
the  number  for  the  year  as  four  hundred  and  seventy  odd, 
three  hundred  and  ninety-six  of  them  being  from  Guinea.^^ 
Between  1699  and  1707  the  annual  number  imported  was 
somewhat  smaller,  as  the  following  list  will  indicate : — 


92  J.  R.  Brackett,  The  Negro  in  Maryland,  in  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity Studies,  extra  volume  vi,  p.  38. 

93  Governor  Seymour  wrote  at  one  time  to  the  Board  of  Trade 
that  before  1698  the  Maryland  planters  were  supplied  with  negroes 
from  Barbadoes  and  other  of  the  queen's  plantations,  such  as  Ja- 
maica and  New  England,  in  small  lots  of  six,  seven,  eight,  nine,  ten 
in  a  sloop;  and  that  whole  shiploads  from  Africa  were  seldom  re- 
ceived. Since  that  date  trade  had  improved  and,  from  the  context 
of  his  letter,  was  presumably  largely  conducted  by  London  ships 
directly  with  the  African  coast  (C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  91).  In  another 
letter  he  says  that  there  was  in  Maryland  "  a  considerably  Quantity 
of  Negroes  from  Gambo  and  the  Gold  Coast  besides  the  Country 
Natives  grown  up"  (C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  74). 

9*C.  0.5:714,  47,  B.  35. 

95  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  498.  It  is  recorded  elsewhere  that  in 
1698  one  man  brought  into  Annapolis  423  negroes  (C.  O.  S:  749, 
Account  of  the  Country  Duty  arising  on  the  Western  Shore  in  Mary- 
land in  1697  and  1698.  See  also  Archives,  vol.  xxii,  p.  160),  and 
that  40  or  50  negroes  were  imported  into  Patuxent  (Archives,  vol. 
xxii,  p.  160).  These  figures  would  make  Nicholson's  account  for 
the  year  an  understatement  of  the  actual  numbers. 


8o 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[522 


2, 

i6qq 

20, 

i6qq 

9, 

1699 

20, 

1700 

7, 

1701 

4, 

1702 

4, 

1702 

4, 

1702 

13, 

1703 

II, 

1704 

2, 

1705 

9, 

1705 

II, 

1705 

II, 

1 705 

— , 

1706 

4, 

1707 

II, 

1707 

Name  of  Ship 

Port  of  Departure 

Number 

Hopewell  Jacob 

London 

86 

African  Galley 

" 

76 

Fairfax 

" 

190 

John  Hopewell^^ 

" 

320 

Betty  Galley 

(( 

64 

Endeavour 

" 

49 

Hunter  Galley 

« 

152 

Providence 

136 

Pinck  Mary 

Barbadoes 

55 

Dolphin 

London 

200 

Brigantine  Dorset 

'* 

131 

Olive  Tree 

" 

150 

Brigantine  Adventure 

" 

90 

Sloop  Swallow 

Barbadoes 

71 

Olive  Tree 

London 

163 

Young  Margarett 

" 

265 

Brigantine  Adventure 

" 

92" 

Date 

May 

July 

August 

July 

October 

July 

July 

Sept. 

July 

June 

July 

July 

August 

August 

July 

August 

August 

In  1708  the  number  had  again  increased,  amounting  to  six 
hundred  and  forty-eight  negroes  imported  in  six  invoices, 
presumably  from  Africa,  in  London  ships.®^ 

These  are  the  only  exact  figures  obtainable  of  the  importa- 
tion of  negroes.  The  whole  number  found  in  Maryland 
during  the  period  increased  considerably,  a  fact  which  must 
be  partly  due  to  an  increase  in  the  number  annually  imported. 
There  were  in  Maryland  in  1704,  4475  negroes,  in  1708, 
4657,  in  1710,  7945,  in  1712,  8408,'''*  and  by  1720  as  many  as 
25,000.^°^  From  these  statements  it  may  be  ascertained  in 
general  that  the  annual  importation  was  comparatively  sta- 
tionary between  1699  and  1708;  that  for  some  reason  the 
number  increased  between  1708  and  1710;  and  that  a  far 
greater  increase  took  place  after  1712,  undoubtedly  the  effect 
of  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht  and  the  Asiento  in  1713. 

The   trade   was   decidedly   profitable.     The   demand    for 

^6  The  master  of  the  John  Hopewell  was  Captain  Munday,  of 
whom  Governor  Blakiston  made  mention  in  a  letter,  "  I  haveing  an 
acc°  of  his  bringing  in  300  Negroes"  (C.  O.  5:  715,  8,  D.  35). 

9^  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  92.  From  a  list  sent  over  in  Governor  Sey- 
mour's letter  of  1708.  , 

9»C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  93.  Again  from  a  list  given  in  Seymours 
letter. 

S9  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  pp.  256-259.  The  president  of  the  Council 
in  1710  reported  a  great  increase  in  the  number  of  negroes  in  Mary- 
land (c.  o.  5: 717, 1-  46). 

i"^oC.  O.  5:  717,  L  106. 


523] 


IMPORTS 


cheap  labor  became  greater  as  more  land  was  settled,  and 
slaves  always  commanded  a  good  price.  There  is  a  record 
in  1695  of  two  negroes  from  Barbadoes  who  were  worth 
respectively  7600  and  10,000  pounds  of  tobacco,  or  about 
£31  and  £41  sterling.^"^  A  male  negro  in  1708  brought 
about  £2,0  and  a  female  £25  or  £26,^°-  which  were  the  prices 
asked  in  Virginia  at  the  time.^°^  A  skipper  who  imported 
a  cargo  of  two  or  three  hundred  negroes  was  sure  of  a  good 
round  profit  from  his  venture,  even  after  allowing  for  the 
cost  of  the  passage  from  the  African  coast. 

Maryland  imported  almost  nothing  else  of  appreciable 
value  from  foreign  countries.^"*  A  single  exception  must 
be  made  of  wines  brought  from  Madeira  and  the  Azores. 
Although  a  considerable  part  of  the  colonial  supply  of  wines 
and  spirits  undoubtedly  came  from  England,^"^  there  was  a 
direct  trade  with  these  islands  large  enough  at  least  to  de- 
serve mention.  Hugh  Jones  in  his  letter  home  in  1698  wrote 
that  "  we  have  wine  brought  us  from  Madera  and  Phiol  and 
rum  from  Barbadoes  bear  Mault  and  Wines  from  England. "^°^ 
The  author  of  the  Narrative  of  a  Voyage  to  Maryland  on  his 
way  home  from  the  colony  fell  in  with  a  sloop  in  distress: 
"  shee  was  come  from  Fiall  butt  was  of  New  England  Called 
the  providence  of  Boston  and  Bound  for  Mariland  Loaden 
with  wine,  shee  had  bin  out  nine  weekes  from  Fyall."^*^^ 

i°i  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  227. 

102  c.  O.  5:  716,  H.  91- 

1^3  Bruce,  vol.  ii,  p.  90. 

10*  There  are  one  or  two  references  to  a  trade  with  Lisbon.  This 
trade,  however,  was  one  from  which  the  colonial  vessels  brought 
back  no  foreign  commodities,  but  received  actual  coin  in  exchange 
for  the  corn  which  they  exported  in  small  quantities  (C.  O.  5:  717. 
I.  106).  In  1697  a  letter  from  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs 
in  England  to  the  governor  of  Maryland  warned  him  that  a  certain 
Captain  Rodgers  had  lately  sailed  from  a  Scottish  port  with  a  cargo 
of  linen  and  other  commodities  for  Maryland  (Archives,  vol.  xxiii, 
p.  328).  This  was  only  a  single  case,  however,  and  had  no  real 
significance  in  the  economy  of  the  province. 

105  The  revenue  accounts  (C.  O.  5:  749)  give  the  duties  on  large 
amounts  of  rum,  spirits,  wine,  and  beer,  but  it  is  clear  from  the 
context  that  most  of  these  liquors  came  from  England  or  the  English 
plantations. 

106  Royal  Society,  Letter  Book,  L  i,  183. 
10''  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 


S2  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [524 

Governor  Seymour  informed  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1708 
that  wine,  rum,  sugar,  molasses,  and  salt  came  from  the 
Azores,  the  West  Indies,  Latitudoes,  and  Providence,  but 
that  a  small  quantity  sufficed  the  colony. ^°^  Governor  Hart 
at  the  end  of  his  administration  wrote  that  Maryland  traded 
with  no  foreign  "  plantation "  except  with  Madeira  for 
wine.^°''  These  casual  references,  which  are  all  that  can 
be  found  on  the  subject,  indicate  that  there  was  some  direct 
importation  of  various  kinds  of  spirits  from  the  islands,  but 
imply  that  it  was  small  in  extent.  Importation  from  other 
places  would  for  the  most  part  have  been  contrary  to  the 
provisions  of  the  Navigation  Acts. 

Maryland  imported  some  goods  from  the  other  English 
colonies.  The  nature  of  the  trade  can  be  ascertained  from 
the  records,  but  it  is  impossible  to  give  the  amount  of  each 
separate  commodity  or  even  a  rough  estimate  of  the  total. 
From  the  island  colonies,  and  perhaps  even  directly  from 
the  Campeachy  coast,^^°  the  province  at  this  time  was  cer- 
tainly receiving  some  rum,  sugar,  molasses,  dye  woods, 
indigo,  and  a  little  ginger  and  cacao."^  The  last  four  articles 
on  the  list  seem  often  to  have  been  reexported  to  England.^^^ 
Vessels  from  New  England,  too,  often  imported  rum,  sugar, 
and  molasses  which  they  had  secured  through  the  West 
Indian  trade. ^^^  In  addition  to  this.  New  England  and  New 
York  merchants  brought  in  some  food-stuffs, — beef,  pork, 
peas,  flour,  biscuits,  malt,  butter,  and  cheese,^^*  also  fish  and 
woodenware,  although  the  importation  of  the  last-named 
article  fell  off  at  the  end  of  the  century .^^^     The  fact  that 

108  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  74. 

"9C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  106. 

110  The  trade  was  in  all  probability  not  directly  with  this  coast,  but 
through  Jamaica. 

"iC.  b.  5:  1309,  24;  C.  O.  s:  716,  H.  74;  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25; 
C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  106. 

112  Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports, 
vols,  i-xvi,  Imports  from  Virginia  and  Maryland. 

"3C.  O.  5:  1264,  p.  90;  C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25. 

"4  Add.  MSS.  28089,  f.  16,  British  Museum;  C.  O.  5 :  1309,  24. 
See  also  earlier  references. 

115  Archives,  vol.  xix,  pp.  511,  5i6,  540,  542,  543,  580,  583;  C.  O.  5' 
716,  H.  22. 


525]  IMPORTS  83 

toward  the  close  of  the  century  Pennsylvania  was  sending 
to  Maryland,  usually  by  land,  some  rum,  beer,  and  sugar, 
considerable  quantities  of  flour  and  bread,  and  a  number  of 
horses,  was  regarded  by  the  people  of  the  colony  as  a  griev- 
ance, because  the  exchange  was  often  made  in  money  or 
European  goods  which  they  were  loath  to  lose.^^*'  After 
1704  the  importation  from  Pennsylvania  of  bread,  beer,  flour, 
malt,  wheat,  grain,  horses,  and  tobacco  was  prohibited  by 
law.""  On  the  whole,  in  spite  of  the  limited  importation 
from  Pennsylvania  before  1704,  Maryland  during  this  period 
was  self-supporting  and  received  little  in  the  way  of  food- 
stuffs from  any  of  the  other  colonies.  Such  commodities 
as  were  imported — and  small  colonial  vessels  were  somewhat 
frequently  to  be  found  in  the  ports  of  the  province — con- 
sisted very  largely  of  rum,  sugar,  and  molasses,  and  to  a 
much  smaller  extent  of  fish  and  woodenware. 

The  results  reached  in  this  chapter  may  be  summarized. 
By  far  the  largest  class  of  imports  were  the  native  manu- 
factures sent  from  England  and  European  goods  reexported 
from  the  home  country  to  Maryland  in  English  ships.  Not 
only  was  it  natural  that  a  colony  exporting  raw  materials 
solely  to  England  should  thus  receive  in  return  British  manu- 
factured  goods,   but   the   exchange    was    also   consistently 

"6  C.  O.  5:  1309,  24;  C.  O.  5:  1257,  4;  C.  O.  5 :  740,  p.  335- 
11'' Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  314;  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  172,  574;  vol.  xxix, 
pp.  238,  310,  328;  vol.  XXX,  p.  226.  In  1709  the  law  was  repealed 
temporarily  in  order  to  relieve  a  scarcity  with  Pennsylvania  food- 
stuffs, but  this  lasted  for  only  one  year  (Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  p. 
482).  Governor  Seymour  commented  at  some  length  on  the  reasons 
for  the  law  of  1704.  "  The  Designe  of  this  Act  was  to  prevent  the 
mischief  our  neighbouring  provinces  use  ag'  us  in  drawing  away  all 
our  Moneys  which  they  have  a  long  time  Practic'd  to  the  great 
Detriment  of  this  poore  Country  who  have  most  industriously  pur- 
sued the  making  of  tobacco  and  neglected  even  necessary  Tillage 
So  that  while  Tobacco  bore  a  price  in  England  wee  had  money  in 
England  worth  the  reaching  Contrivance  of  our  Neighbours  to  gripe 
at  which  they  have  so  effectually  done  that  this  province  trusting 
to  their  Manufacture  of  tobacco  have  overdrawne  themselves  in 
England  and  the  pensilvanians  who  have  traded  upon  a  Certainty 
got  many  of  this  province  into  their  Debts — The  Generall  prohibi- 
tion I  Confess  is  not  so  regular  and  it  had  been  better  to  have  laid 
a  large  duty  but  this  province  stands  on  the  Levell  with  other  her 
Maj*''^  Governments  in  America"  (C.  O.  5:  715,  G.  25,  1705  bundle). 


84  MARYLAND   TR.VDE,   1689-I715  [526 

favored  by  British  statesmen  as  furnishing  a  market  for  their 
own  products.  Nevertheless,  although  the  amount  was  large 
and  was  widely  distributed  throughout  the  province,  the 
colony  generally  exported  more  than  it  received  in  return, 
and  in  some  years  the  imports  from  England  were  not  large 
enough  to  satisfy  the  real  needs  of  the  people.  Under  these 
circumstances  the  officials  feared  lest  the  colonists  might 
begin  to  manufacture  for  themselves,  but  this  did  not  prove 
to  be  the  case,  the  colony  developing  no  forms  of  manufac- 
ture that  could  rival  those  of  the  mother  country.  Great 
Britain  also  supplied  Maryland  with  white  labor,  the  trade 
in  indentured  servants  forming  a  considerable  feature  of  the 
importations.  The  chief  commodities  received  from  foreign 
countries  were  negroes  from  Africa,  who  were  brought  over 
in  annually  increasing  numbers,  and  island  wines,  which 
were  a  steady  but  always  a  minor  feature  of  colonial 
trade.  From  the  other  British  possessions  were  received 
practically  only  West  Indian  products,  rum,  sugar,  and  molas- 
ses, and  very  small  quantities  of  food-stuffs.  Taken  all  in 
all,  the  British  imports  were  so  varied  in  kind  and  so  exten- 
sive in  amount  that  they  well  nigh  precluded  the  necessity 
of  drawing  upon  other  sources. 


CHAPTER  III 

Trade  Routes  and  Illicit  Trade 

The  production  of  tobacco,  which  was  one  of  the  enumer- 
ated commodities,  and  which  had  therefore  to  be  sent  directly 
to  England  or  to  English  colonies,^  was  largely  responsible 
for  the  fact  that  Maryland  trade  was  almost  exclusively  with 
England.  A  rough  estimate  of  the  total  number  of  ships 
concerned  in  this  trade  may  be  made  for  the  years  1689  to 
1701,2  as  follows : — 

YearS  Number  Year  Number 

1689  10-14*  1696  60 

1690  49-52  1697  79 

1691  15-16  1698  IZ 

1692  81-89  1699  98 

1693  56-59  1700  48 

1694  44-47  1701  52 
169s                                          71 

1  As  early  as  October  24,  1621,  Virginia  was  forbidden  to  send 
tobacco  elsewhere  than  to  England  (Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col. 
vol.  i,  p.  48).  A  royal  proclamation  of  September,^  1624,  strongly 
implied  that  the  colonists .  were  to  bring  their  entire  product  to 
England  (Rymer,  vol.  xvii,  p.  621),  though  the  statement  was  not 
expressly  made  until  the  substance  of  the  proclamation  was  repeated 
in  March,  1625  (ibid.,  vol.  xvii,  p.  668).  Mr.  Osgood  says  with 
regard  to  the  earlier  proclamation  that  "  though  this  proclamation 
lapsed  with  the  death  of  James  I,  its  principles  were  adhered  to,  and 
in  later  orders  express  reference  was  made  to  its  contents  as  em- 
bodying valued  ideas  and  precedents"  (vol.  iii,  p.  197).  The  Navi- 
gation Act  of  1660,  by  placing  tobacco  on  the  list  of  enumerated 
commodities,  made  its  export  to  foreign  countries  definitely  illegal. 
How  far  this  prohibition  was  effective  in  Maryland  will  be  seen  later. 

2  This  estimate  is  made  up  from  figures  obtained  from  C.  O.  5 : 
749,  passim,  and  from  a  list  of  ships  entering  Maryland,  to  be  found 
in  the  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  236. 

s  From  i68g  to  1691  the  figures  are  based  on  a  computation  from 
both  C.  O.  5 :  749,  for  Pocomoke  District  and  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p. 
236,  for  Patuxent  District.  In  1692  the  Archives  list  runs  only  to 
September,  so  is  manifestly  incomplete. 

■*  In  making  up  these  figures  the  port  from  which  the  ship  sails, 
in  every  case  where  it  is  given,  is  taken  in  preference  to  that  for 
which  it  is  bound.  Where  two  figures  are  given  for  a  year  it  indi- 
cates that  the  place  of  ownership  of   several   ships   is   not   stated, 

85 


86  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [528 

Evidently  the  number  of  vessels  participating  in  this  trade 
varied  considerably  from  year  to  year.  The  largest  num- 
ber in  any  one  year  was  ninety-eight,  and  the  average  num- 
ber, made  up  from  the  years  when  the  lists  are  more  nearly 
complete,  1692  to  1699,  was  seventy-two.^ 

No  pretense  at  a  complete  record  of  Maryland  shipping 
can  be  made  for  the  later  years,  but  some  information  on 
the  subject  can  be  compiled  from  one  or  two  scattered  ac- 
counts of  fleets  leaving  Virginia  and  from  the  more  or  less 
vague  remarks  of  different  men  in  the  two  provinces.  Gov- 
ernor Nicholson  wrote  to  the  Board  of  Trade  in  July,  1702, 
that  a  fleet  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  sail  was  just  about  to  go 
through  the  Capes,  leaving  few  or  no  ships  in  Virginia  and 
not  many  in  Maryland.''  Virginia  has  preserved  lists  of  two 
fleets  leaving  the  colony  in  1703,  with  a  total  of  one  hundred 
and  seventy-eight  vessels  ready  to  sail,  eleven  more  being 
delayed  for  a  few  weeks,'^  and  a  list  of  1704  of  one  hundred 
and  twenty-six  vessels.^  A  paper  written  on  the  state  of  the 
tobacco  trade  in  1708  makes  the  statement  that  the  trade 
employed  annually  two  or  three  hundred  ships.®  If  Mary- 
land's exports  were  about  thirty-six  per  cent  of  the  total  for 
the  two  provinces,  her  share  of  the  combined  fleet  annually 

although  the  probabiHty  is  that  they  were  from  English  ports.  If 
they  are  counted,  the  larger  figure  is  correct  for  each  year. 

5  The  years  1700  and  1701  are  incomplete,  as  no  account  can  be 
found  for  Potomac  District.  This  would  explain  the  discrepancy 
between  these  figures  and  those  of  earlier  years.  The  record  quoted 
in  Chapter  I,  page  35,  also  gives  the  number  of  English  and  plantation 
ships  leaving  Maryland  between  1690  and  1701.  This  account  is  no 
more  accurate  than  that  of  exported  tobacco,  but  it  may  be  com- 
pared with  the  figures  for  English  vessels  given  above  and  for 
plantation  ships  on  pages  110-113. 

Period 
1690-Feb.    1691/92 

1692-one  half  1693 

1693-1694 
I 694- I 696 
1696-1698 
1698-I7OO 

1700-one  half  1701 

C.  O.  390:  6,  p.  145. 
^  C.  O.  5:  1312,  40. 
7C.  O.  5:  1313,  35,  36. 

8  C.  O.  5 :  1314,  22  (ii),  22  (v),  L.  38. 

9  Egerton  MSS.  921,  f .  10,  British  Museum. 


English 

Plantation 

14 

9 

14 

15 

52 

30 

96 

36 

91 

14 

112 

7 

68 

5 

529]        TRADE  ROUTES  AND  ILLICIT  TRADE  8/ 

concerned  in  the  tobacco  trade  could  not  have  been  much 
over  one  third,  or  considerably  fewer  than  one  hundred 
ships,  a  fact  v^hich  v^ill  bear  out  the  more  exact  estimate  of 
the  Maryland  fleets  by  themselves,  made  from  1689  to  1701. 
Nevertheless,  the  list  of  ships  clearing  from  English  ports 
for  Maryland  for  the  years  from  1714  to  1716  inclusive  must 
manifestly  be  incomplete  unless  the  trade  had  seriously  retro- 
graded, which  was  not  the  case.  Only  thirty  ships  were 
so  recorded  in  1714,  thirty-four  in  1715,  and  forty-four  in 
1716."  But  as  soon  after  this  as  1720  Governor  Hart  esti- 
mated that  about  one  hundred  sail  of  ships  came  annually 
from  Great  Britain  into  the  colony.^^  On  the  whole,  the 
total  number  of  vessels  trading  yearly  between  Great  Britain 
and  Maryland  during  the  twenty-five  years  of  royal  govern- 
ment could  never  have  exceeded  one  hundred,  and  probably 
averaged,  according  to  the  figures  presented  above,  from 
seventy  to  seventy-five.^- 

London  was  evidently  the  chief  center  for  the  tobacco 
trade  in  England,  as  it  was  from  there  that  the  largest  num- 
ber of  ships  came.  It  is  certain^^  that  there  were  in  the  plan- 
tation between  1689  and  1701  at  least  the  following  ships 
from  the  chief  English  seaport: — 

Number 

54 
2>6 
57 
31 
34 

1°  C.  O.  390:  8,  An  Account  of  Ships  cleared  from  English  ports. 

11  C.  O.  5  :  717,  I.  106. 

12  The  constant  complaint  from  the  colony  of  lack  of  adequate 
shipping  to  carry  away  the  annual  crops  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
these  figures  did  not  materially  increase  throughout  the  whole  period 
of  royal  government.  Governor  Hart,  even  as  late  as  1720,  may 
still  have  been  expressing  himself  in  round  numbers,  well  outside 
the  actual  facts  of  the  case. 

13  In  reckoning  the  ports  from  which  ships  sailed  the  larger  figures 
given  in  the  earlier  list  cannot  be  used,  as  there  is  no  way  of  telling 
from  what  port  in  England  a  vessel  sailed,  although  its  English 
ownership  in  general  may  be  almost  certain. 

1*  These  figures  are  compiled  from  the  volume  already  used  to 
ascertain  the  total  number  of  ships  in  the  colony,  C.  O.  5 :  749. 


Year 

Number 

Year 

1689" 

I 

1696 

1690 

19 

1697 

169I 

7 

1698 

1692 

39 

1699 

1693 

32 

1700 

1694 

14 

I70I 

1695 

41 

88  MARYLAND    TRADE,  1689-I715  [530 

The  average  number  of  vessels  sailing  from  London  to 
Maryland  annually,  therefore,  is  found  to  be  thirty-seven.^^ 
Their  tonnage  ran  from  fifty  to  three  hundred  and  sixty  tons, 
the  average  being  one  hundred  and  seventy  tons.  These 
ships  were  usually  described  as  "  square-sterns  "  or  "  ships  " 
as  distinguished  from  brigantines,  ketches,  or  sloops. 

The  outports  concerned  in  the  tobacco  trade  were  chiefly 
the  seaport  towns  in  the  west  or  southwest  of  England,^*' — 
Liverpool,  Chester,  Bristol,  Barnstaple,  Bideford,  Plymouth, 
Dartmouth,  Lyme,  Weymouth,  and  Exeter,  although  White- 
haven also  sent  several  vessels  nearly  every  year  to  Maryland, 
and  scattering  ships  came  not  infrequently  from  Workington, 
Newcastle,  Stockton,  Scarborough,  Hull,  Colchester,  and 
Deal.^^  Whitehaven,  Liverpool,  Bristol,  Bideford,  and 
Plymouth  were  the  most  important  towns.  The  total  num- 
ber of  outport  ships  coming  into  the  colony  annually  be- 
tween 1689  and  1701  averaged  as  high  as  thirty-three,^^  the 
number  varying,  however,  considerably  from  year  to  year. 


Year 

Number 

Year 

Number 

1689 

9 

1696 

38 

1690 

30 

1697 

24 

169I 

8 

1698 

37 

1692 

39 

1699 

42 

1693 

24 

1700 

17 

1694 

30 

I7OI 

i8i9 

1695 

30 

Almost  as  many  vessels,  therefore,  came  to  Maryland  from 
the  outports  as  from  London,  but  they  were  almost  all  smaller 
in  size,  the  largest  being  not  over  two  hundred  and  fifty  tons, 
and  the  average  not  over  eighty.  It  will  be  shown  that  sev- 
eral of  these  ships  were  built  and  owned  in  the  colony. 

1^  As  in  the  earlier  list,  the  average  is  made  up  from  the  vears 
1692-1699,  in  order  to  obtain  what  is  probably  a  more  accurate  result. 

iGC.  O.  5:  716,  H.  74. 

^"  C.  O.  390:  8;  C.  O.  5:  749.  Governor  Nicholson  remarked  in 
one  of  his  letters  home  that  "  North  and  West  Country  Vessels  " 
came  to  Maryland  (C.  O.  5:  719,  Bundle  4,  no.  12). 

^^  This  average  is  also  made  for  the  years  from  1692  to  1699 
inclusive. 

i»  C.  O.  5  :  749. 


53  l]  TRADE    ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT    TRADE  89 

Every  year,  then,  while  the  royal  governors  were  in  Mary- 
land, an  average  of  seventy  ships  arrived  from  England 
to  receive  their  lading  of  25,000  hogsheads  of  tobacco.  For 
the  most  part  these  ships  obtained  cargoes  from  the  West- 
ern Shore  districts,  Annapolis,  Patuxent,  and  Potomac,  as 
comparatively  little  tobacco  was  sent  home  from  the  Eastern 
Shore.-*^  The  tobacco  exported  was  not  always  loaded 
directly  on  the  larger  ships,  except  when  the  plantation 
shipping  the  staple  lay  near  where  the  vessels  had  anchored. 
Sloops  were  usually  sent  to  the  various  private  landing 
places-^  up  and  down  the  creeks  and  rivers  to  load  and 
bring  back  each  planter's  crop.  This  was  convenient  for 
the  planters,  but  hard  on  the  ship-captains,  and  it  gave  great 
opportunities  for  fraud  in  evasion  of  duties  or  misrepresen- 
tation of  the  grade  of  tobacco  shipped.-- 

In  1683  an  attempt  was  made  to  improve  and  systematize 
the  conditions  of  lading  tobacco  by  the  enactment  of  a  colo- 
nial statute  creating  a  certain  number  of  towns  to  which  all 
tobacco  must  be  brought  for  shipment."^  The  effects  of  this 
law  were  entirely  lost,  however,  by  a  decision  made  by  Lord 
Baltimore  in  1688  that  tobacco  did  not  have  to  be  brought 
into  the  towns  to  be  sold.-*  Later  the  home  government 
and  English  officials  in  the  colony  endeavored  to  have  the 

20  That  the  Eastern  Shore  was  not  so  largely  concerned  in  tobacco 
trade  as  the  Western  the  exact  lists  of  the  export  from  each  dis- 
trict, given  in  Chapter  I,  footnotes  108-112  inclusive,  will  indicate. 
The  amount  of  tobacco  and  the  number  of  ships  given  in  these  lists 
for  Pocomoke  are  much  smaller  than  for  either  of  the  Western 
Shore  districts.  In  addition  there  is  the  statement  of  Sir  Thomas 
Lawrence  in  1695  that  because  few  ships  went  to  the  Eastern  Shore 
the  colonists  there  had  almost  stopped  growing  tobacco,  and  were 
turning  to  manufacturing  instead  (C.  O.  5:  713,  iis). 

21  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  28.  In  1705  Seymour  wrote  to  the  secre- 
tary of  state  that  all  the  planters  opposed  the  establishment  of  ports 
"  for  the  Sake  of  clandestinly  unshipping  the  Goods  brought  from 
England,  and  Shipping  their  tobacco  at  their  owne  Dores,  which 
makes  it  impossible  for  all  the  Officers  in  the  World  to  know  what 
is  shipt  or  unshipt  "   (C.  O.  5:  721,  no.  3). 

"  C.  O.  5:  1314,  M.  7,  Reasons  alleged  in  a  representation  of  mer- 
chants trading  to  Virginia,  who  asked  for  fixed  ports  in  the  tobacco 
colonies. 

23  Archives,  vol.  vii,  p.  609. 

-*  Ibid.,  vol.  viii,  p.  61. 


90 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [53^ 


law  reenacted.-^  In  1705  an  elaborate  scheme  to  prevent 
abuses  in  the  tobacco  trade  was  presented  to  the  Board  of 
Trade  in  England.'*^  It  recommended  the  selection  by  Act 
of  Parliament,  or  by  the  governor  in  virtue  of  his  royal  pre- 
rogative, of  five  landing  places  or  ports  in  Maryland  from 
which  tobacco  must  be  shipped  by  the  twentieth  of  April 
annually,  in  order  that  the  lading  of  the  fleet  might  be 
hastened  and  regulated.-'  This  scheme  was  not  carried  out, 
but  repeated  representations  from  England  at  last  induced 
the  Maryland  Assembly  to  pass  another  bill  (1706)  appoint- 
ing certain  towns  where  tobacco  could  be  loaded  on  board 
ships,  and  public  landing  places  from  which  it  could  con- 
veniently be  sent  to  the  towns.^^  This  law,  too,  was  a  dead 
letter,  and  it  was  repealed  in  England  a  few  years  later-^ 
because  it  was  feared  that  the  creation  of  towns  would  en- 
courage manufactures.^"  Apparently  no  new  towns  were 
erected  while  the  law  was  in  operation,^^  and  the  old  desul- 
tory method  of  lading  still  prevailed.  Ship-masters  got  their 
cargo  how  and  where  they  could,  for  the  most  part  continu- 
ing to  ship  it  on  sloops  from  the  planters'  private  wharves 
along  the  bay  or  in  the  rivers. 

25  Privy  Council  Register,  74,  p.  429,  June  30,  1692;  C.  O.  5 :  1262, 
48,  August  4,  1703 ;  C.  O.  5 :  726.  pp.  34i,  343,  369- 

26  C.  O.  5:  715,  G.  II,  G.  12,  Bundle  1705. 

2"  Governor  Seymour  and  the  other  advocates  of  this  plan  en- 
dorsed it  not  only  as  a  remedy  for  the  difficulty  in  lading,  but 
because  it  would  tend  to  prevent  illegal  trade  (C.  O.  5:  715,  G.  12, 
Bundle  1705;  C.  O.  5 :  1314,  M.  7,  M.  10;  C.  O.  5:  1261,  139;  Sloane 
MSS.  2902,  f.  244,  British  Museum). 

28  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  636.     Supplement  in  vol.  xxvii,  p.  159. 

29  Privy  Council  Register,  82,  p.  491,  December  15,  1709;  C.  O.  5 : 
717,  I.  2;  C.  O.  5:  727,  p.  161.  Apparently  this  repeal  was  not 
unpleasing  to  the  ship-captains  themselves.  One  of  them  petitioned 
the  Maryland  Council  before  the  law  was  repealed  that  he  might 
be  allowed  to  trade  in  Chester  River,  where  there  was  no  town  set 
up,  as   his   trade  suffered  by  the  prohibition    (Archives,   vol.  xxv, 

30  C.  O.  5  :  1316,  O.  44,  O.  45,  O.  50.  ,    ,      ^ 

31  In  December,  1708,  the  following  comment  was  made  by  Gover- 
nor Seymour:  "The  ports  in  this  province  may  perhaps  be  worthy 
of  the  name  of  Townes  but  the  other  Townes  will  only  Serve  for 
Rowling-places  to  receive  tobacco's  in  order  to  be  water  borne"  (C. 
O.  S:  716,  H.  100). 


533]  TRADE   ROUTES    AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  9 1 

With  the  fleets  fully  laden  and  ready  for  the  homeward 
passage,  difficulties  had  still  to  be  met.  During  almost  the 
whole  period  of  royal  government  in  Maryland  the  voyage 
between  England  and  the  colony  was  fraught  not  only  with 
the  dangers  of  the  deep,  but  with  the  almost  greater  peril  of 
capture  by  the  enemy  as  well.  It  was  a  long,  hard  voyage  at 
best,  and  in  time  of  war  an  unprotected  ship  was  liable  to  be 
captured  either  off  the  coast  of  England  or  when  it  reached 
the  West  Indian  or  continental  colonies.  French  privateers 
were  especially  fond  of  waiting  off  the  English  coast  to  cap- 
ture homeward-bound  ships  laden  with  colonial  commodities. 
The  author  of  the  Narrative  of  a  Voyage  to  Maryland  has 
described  the  precautions  which  his  vessel,  returning  with  only 
two  other  ships,  took  to  avoid  capture.  When  they  got  near 
the  coast,  "  the  Commanders  mett  aboard  of  the  great  ship 
to  consult  what  they  had  best  doe  whether  they  should  make 
directly  for  the  Chops  of  the  Channell  or  whether  they  should 
saile  North  about  by  Ireland  and  Scottland  and  att  last  itt  was 
Concluded  that  wee  should  goe  north  aboutt  by  reason  they 
did  beleive  that  a  great  many  French  privatteere  might  be 
in  the  Channell  picking  upp  the  Scatterrers  of  the  Virginia 
Fleete."^-  On  account  of  this  danger  it  was  the  policy  of 
the  English  government  to  permit  vessels  outward  bound  to 
the  colonies  to  sail  only  in  fleets  or  under  the  protection  of 
an  English  man-of-war,  and  governors  of  the  colonies  were 
enjoined  to  take  similar  precautions  with  those  bound  for 
home. 

In  1689-1690  a  general  embargo  was  laid  in  England  on 
ships  bound  to  Virginia  or  Maryland,  but  a  fleet  of  thirty- 
four  already  made  up  was  allowed  to  sail.^^  At  the  same 
time  orders  were  sent  to  Virginia  that  the  colonial  govern- 
ment should  prevent  the  sailing  of  single  ships  either  from 
there  or  from  Maryland.^*  Governors  Copley  and  Nichol- 
son were  both  carefully  instructed  that  no  ships  should  leave 

32  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum. 

33  Privy  Council  Register,  ^2>,  PP-  356,  357- 
3*  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  787. 


92  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [534 

Maryland  except  in  fleets  or  with  convoys,"^  and  due  pre- 
cautions continued  to  be  taken  in  England^*^  to  the  same 
effect.  A  suspension  of  the  orders  for  convoys  naturally 
took  place  during  the  short  interval  of  peace  from  1697  to 
1702,^'  but  they  were  renewed  again  when  the  war  of  the 
Spanish  succession  broke  out  and  were  in  force  until  1713.^^ 
This  system  of  fleets  and  convoys  for  the  colonies  had 
been  established  even  before  the  period  of  the  French  wars, 
and  it  made  the  trade  so  much  safer  that  London  merchants 
frequently  petitioned  the  Privy  Council  for  a  convoy.^^  On 
the  other  hand,  the  delay  incurred  in  waiting  for  the  fleet 
often  injured  the  ship's  cargo  and  so  lowered  the  profits  on 
its  sale.  Traders  who  owned  fairly  large  or  well-armed 
ships  were,  therefore,  sometimes  willing  to  incur  the  risk  of 
having  them  sail  alone,  and  would  petition  that  their  vessels 
might  not  be  held  up  by  any  embargo."'''  This  practice  evi- 
dently started  a  regular  system  of  permits,  and  a  large  num- 
ber of  vessels  were  annually  allowed  to  sail  from  England 
alone  and  to  return  from  the  colonies  whenever  they  were 
ready,  regardless  of  the  fleet. 

35  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  380;  vol.  xxiii,  p.  547- 

36  Privy  Council  Register,  75,  p.  18. 

37  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  350. 

38  C.  O.  5:  726,  p.   146;  C.  O.  5:   1313,30.  r.   ■        r^  1 

39  C.  O.  5:  1309,  6;  C.  O.  5:  1313.  34,  4  ("),  6  (1)  ;  Privy  Council 
Register,  78,  p.  319.     Examples  could  be  multiplied. 

4^  The  Privy  Council  Register  between  1689  and  1713  's  full  of 
petitions  for  ships  to  sail  without  convoy,  requests  which  in  almost 
every  case  were  granted.  See  also  Privy  Council  Papers,  Unbound 
packets  of  petitions,  etc.,  1702,  Bundle  2.  Other  specific  requests 
may  be  found  in  C.  O.  5 :  W^S,  N.  4;  C.  O.  5:  7i6,  H.  i.  The  in- 
struction to  Thomas  Tench,  1702/3,  that  no  ships  except  those  with 
licenses  be  permitted  to  come  alone  from  Maryland  seems  to  imply 
a  regular  license  system  (C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  46).  Four  years  later 
Governor  Seymour  was  directed  to  allow  all  ships  that  could  not 
get  ready  for  a  certain  convoy  to  load  and  sail  when  they  could 
(C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  37).  In  one  of  the  volumes  in  the  Colonial  Office 
Papers  there  are  entries  between  December,  1706,  and  April,  1710, 
of  one  hundred  and  forty-two  ships  bound  to  Virginia  or  Maryland 
which  are  directed  by  the  secretary  of  state  not  to  be  held  m  the 
colonies  (C.  O.  5:  210).  The  Petition  Entry  Book  contains,  between 
1710  and  1712,  twenty-nine  petitions  from  ships  which  wanted  to  go 
to  the  tobacco  colonies  without  a  convoy.  The  tonnage,  numbers 
of  men,  and  guns  are  carefully  stated  in  each  petition.  These  last 
requests  are  all  referred  to  the  Admiralty  for  settlement  (State 
Papers  Domestic,  Petition  Entry  Book,  vol.  xi). 


535]  TRADE   ROUTES    AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  93 

In  Maryland  the  colonial  government  felt  free  to  regulate 
independently  the  sailing  of  ships  from  the  colony,  the  Coun- 
cil or  Assembly  not  infrequently  deciding  to  allow  a  ship  left 
behind  by  the  fleet  to  sail  alone  or  with  other  vessels  in  a 
similar  predicament.*^  Ships  were  not  allowed,  however,  to 
go  alone  w^hen  a  fleet  was  in  the  colonies.*-  Under  ordinary 
circumstances  the  colonial  government  made  careful  arrange- 
ments to  have  the  Maryland  ships  sail  under  convoy  with 
the  Virginia  fleet.*^  It  was  customary  for  the  commodore 
of  the  fleet  to  send  word  up  the  bay  that  he  was  ready  to 
sail  for  home.  His  letter  would  then  be  published  in  the 
counties  or  personal  warning  would  be  sent  to  the  captains 
of  ships  in  Maryland.  Usually  this  was  sufficient  notice,"** 
and  ships  would  thereupon  be  ordered  by  the  government 
to  collect  at  the  mouths  of  the  Patuxent  and  the  Potomac  pre- 
paratory to  joining  the  \^irginia  fleet.  The  collectors  or  naval 
officers  were  supposed  to  take  bond  from  each  vessel  before  it 
sailed  that  it  would  first  stop  at  Point  Comfort,  where  the 
fleet  with  its  convoy  gathered.*^  Sometimes  Maryland  had 
difficulty  in  learning  when  the  fleet  was  to  sail,*^  but  usually 
the  system  worked  smoothly.  With  few  exceptions  it  may 
be  said  that  the  colonial  government  cooperated  with  the 
Privy  Council  in  attempting  to  carry  out  its  regulations,  and 
the  danger  from  pirates,  if  not  from  the  French,  made  the 
ordinary  ship-captain  only  too  glad  to  accept  a  convoy  even 
in  time  of  peace.*" 

It  was  some  time,  however,  before  the  arrival  of  these 


41  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  255;  vol.  xix,  pp.  94,  382,  548;  vol.  xx, 
PP-  139,  306,  582;  vol.  XXV,  pp.  118,  189,  190,  225. 

*-  Ibid.,  vol.  XX,  p.  396. 

43  Ibid.,  vol.  XX,  pp.  19,  79,  146,  147,  429,  513,  570;  vol.  xxiv,  p. 
141 ;  vol.  XXV,  pp.  149,  202. 

*4  In  one  case  the  sailing  of  the  whole  fleet  from  Virginia  was 
delayed  a  month  because  the  Maryland  vessels  had  been  hindered 
in  loading  their  tobacco  by  a  very  severe  winter  (ibid.,  vol.  xxiii, 
pp.  9-11). 

45  There  is  a  reference  in  the  Archives  to  one  instance  where  the 
ships  in  Maryland  were  ordered  to  join  convoys  in  New  York  in- 
stead of  in  Virginia  (vol.  xxvi,  p.  61). 

46  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  14,  H.  76. 

47  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  118. 


94 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [536 


fleets  could  be  so  regulated  as  to  please  both  merchant  and 
planter.  It  has  already  been  explained  in  what  way  the  time 
of  arrival  in  the  colonies  and  the  number  of  fleets  which 
came  each  year  were  thought  to  affect  the  price  of  tobacco. 
These  two  considerations  were  of  importance  to  the  English 
government  as  well,  both  on  account  of  the  necessary  con- 
voy, and  because  of  its  desire  for  the  success  of  the  fleet  and 
its  cargo.  If  there  were  but  one  fleet  a  year,  it  would  of 
course  be  unnecessary  to  send  more  than  one  convoy.*^  If 
the  ships  arrived  in  the  autumn,  the  importations  from  Eng- 
land, consisting  so  largely  of  woollens,  could  be  sold  before 
the  winter  set  in.***  If  the  ships  left  the  colonies  in  the 
spring,  they  would  avoid  the  rotting  of  the  ships'  hulls  by 
the  worm  and  sickness  among  the  sailors  on  account  of  the 
heat.^^  Various  opinions  were  expressed  on  these  ques- 
tions,^^ but  Ouary's  arguments^^  settled  the  matter  in  the 
minds  of  the  Board  of  Trade  and  the  Privy  Council.^^ 
"With  regard  to  the  Generall  Security  and  Advantage  of 
that  Trade,  and  to  the  present  occasions  which  your  Majesty 
might  otherwise  have  for  your  Shiping,  One  Convoy  a  Year, 
may  Suffice  to  Carry  on  this  Trade  dureing  the  Warr,  which 
Convoy  as  is  Generally  Agreed  by  all  the  Traders,  may  be  ap- 
pointed to  Sail  about  the  Midle  of  August  or  not  later 
than  the  beginning  of  September,  So  as  to  Arrive  in  the 
Rivers  of  Virginia  in  December,  that  they  may  have  time  to 
unload  and  Distribute  the  Manufactures  and  other  Goods 
from  England  to  the  Planters,  As  also  to  Load  the  Tobacco 
within  the  severall  Rivers  of  Virginia  and  Maryland,  and  to 
Return  from  thence  in  the  Month  of   May   following  by 

48  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  64;  C.  O.  5:  1^,  P-  428;  Privy  Council  Regis- 
ter, 81,  pp.  304,  30s,  Copy  of  a  Representation  of  the  Board  of  Trade 
and  an  Order  in  Council  thereupon;  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col. 
vol.  ii,  p.  514- 

49C.  O.  s:  1308,  6;  C.  O.  S:  1313,  18  (i).  ^  ^.^     ^^ 

50  C.  O.  5 :  1313,  4,  4  (i),  4  (iii),  5  (i),  7  (0,  10,  16  (1)  ;  C.  O.  5 : 
3,  February  2,  1705/6. 

51  Compare  C.  O.  5 :  I3I5,  N.  20,  N.  21,  N.  2Z,  N.  26 ;  C.  O.  S  :  3,  121. 

52  C.  O.  5:  3,  February  2,  170S/6;  C.  O.  5 :  I3i5,  N.  ^l. 

53  C.  O.  5:  3,  121;  C.  O.  5:  131S,  N.  64;  C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  428;  Acts 
of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  SI4- 


537]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  95 

which  means  the  Convoy  and  Fleet  will  avoid  the  Badd 
Seasons  in  the  Country  and  the  Worm,  which  in  the  Hott 
Months  is  so  prejudicial!  to  them,  and  may  arrive  in  England 
Soon  enough  to  goe  out  again  with  the  next  Convoy  at  the 
same  Season,  which  method  We  humbly  conceive  may  best 
furnish  the  Planters  with  those  European  Commoditys  which 
they  stand  in  need  of,  and  hinder  them  from  applying  their 
Labour  to  any  other  Product  or  Manufacture  then  that  of 
Tobacco."^*  Whether  the  fleet  came  to  Maryland  precisely 
once  a  year  after  1706  is  not  certain,  but  at  least  the  English 
government  did  what  it  could  to  regulate  and  to  protect 
Maryland's  great  trade  route  and  the  vessels  engaged  in  it. 
The  probability  is  that  after  1706,  and  indeed  even  be- 
fore that  date,  large  fleets  did  come  annually  to  Maryland, 
and  that  the  trade  was  carried  on,  with  comparatively  few 
carefully  licensed  exceptions,  only  through  a  regular  system 
of  fleets  and  convoys  which  minimized  the  dangers  of  the 
voyage. 

The  tobacco  of  Maryland,  on  reaching  England,  came  into 
the  hands  of  wholesale  merchants  in  the  various  coast 
towns.  Of  these  the  London  merchants  were  by  far  the 
most  influential.  They  owned  most  of  the  ships  engaged 
in  the  trade,^^  and  they  bought  the  greater  part  of  the  annual 
crop.  The  fixing  of  freight  rates  and  the  price  of  tobacco 
was  therefore  largely  under  their  control.  They  also  ex- 
erted what  influence  they  possessed  over  the  governmental 
policy  toward  the  trade,  and  they  negotiated  for  foreign 
tobacco  markets.  All  outport  merchants  were  forced  to  sub- 
mit to  their  arrangements  with  regard  to  fleets,  prices,  and 
markets. 

The  most  conspicuous  among  these  London  merchants 
were  men  whose  names  appear  again  and  again  in  the  records 
of  the  period.  Micajah  Perry,  perhaps  the  most  influential 
of  all,  was  a  large  shipowner  and  tobacco  importer  and  was 
at  one  time  agent   for  Virginia.     Peter   Paggen,   another 

5*  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  514. 
55  C.  O.  5  :  749- 


96  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [538 

prominent  merchant,  was  also  for  a  short  time  agent  for 
Maryland.  Through  him  the  arms  that  the  colony  needed 
for  its  militia  were  purchased.  In  some  cases  several  mem- 
bers of  one  family  were  concerned  in  the  trade  with  Virginia 
and  Maryland.  The  captain  of  a  ship  was  often  the  brother 
or  perhaps  the  cousin  of  her  owner.  The  Brownes,  of  whom 
Peregrine  was  especially  prominent,  the  Braines,  the  Yoak- 
leys,  and  the  Mundays  were  examples  of  such  families. 
Henry  Munday  at  one  time  had  to  enter  into  a  heavy  bond  in 
Maryland  because  he  was  suspected  of  having  had  some  con- 
nection with  pirates,  and  when  he  returned  to  England,  some 
members  of  this  prominent  group  of  merchants  offered  secur- 
ity for  him.''''  These  men  were  all  closely  connected  in  the 
tobacco  trade,  and  conducted  their  business  with  a  con- 
spicuous solidarity  of  interest.  In  the  absence  of  effective 
competition  from  the  outports  the  planters  were  entirely 
at  their  mercy.  The  exorbitant  freight  charges  which  they 
fixed  were  partly  responsible  for  the  frequency  with  which 
the  planters  fell  into  debt  to  the  merchants  in  England  and 
for  the  general  state  of  poverty  in  the  two  provinces.^^  The 
planters  must  also  have  been  often  cheated  by  unscrupulous 
ship-captains,  for  the  Maryland  Assembly  in  1705  passed  a 
law  obliging  all  masters  of  ships  to  publish  their  rates  before 
loading  any  tobacco,  and  imposing  on  them  a  severe  penalty 
for  making  any  subsequent  change.-'^^ 

The  influence  of  the  London  merchants  was  no  less  de- 
cisive in  determining  the  method  by  which  all  tobacco  des- 
tined for  the  foreign  market  should  be  packed  and  shipped 
to  England.     By  far  the  greater  part  of  the  commodity  was 

56  These  merchants  asked  that  Munday's  bond  in  Maryland  be  dis- 
charged, and  they  offered  to  produce  security  for  him  in  England 
if  it  should  be  demanded  (C.  O.  5:  /IQ,  Bundle  7,  1699-1702,  15,  16). 

!57  Add.  MSS.  22265,  f-  102,  British  Museum.  There  are  a  number 
of  records  testifying  that  the  freight  charges  were  exorbitant  (Ar- 
chives, vol.  xix,  p.  516;  vol.  xxvii,  p.  465;  C.  O.  5 :  7^5,  i/OS  bundle, 
G.  12).  Only  once  is  the  statement  made  that  freight  was  low  m 
the  colonies,  and  this  was  because  the  annual  crop  was  small,  whereas 
an  unusually  large  number  of  ships  had  entered  the  bay   (C.  O.  5: 

1309,  74). 
^^  Archives,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  345- 


539]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT    TRADE  97 

packed  and  shipped  in  casks,  more  or  less  carefully  marked 
and  graded,  but  a  certain  amount  was  frequently  sent  over 
in  bulk,  especially  through  the  outports.^''  The  London 
merchants  protested  vigorously  against  the  practice  of  ship- 
ping in  bulk,  because  it  facilitated  smuggling  and  depreciated 
the  price.''"  Governor  Copley  was  ordered  by  the  king  to 
have  a  law  passed  in  Maryland  prohibiting  the  exportation 
of  tobacco  in  bulk/'^  but  the  Assembly  refused  to  follow  his 
bidding."-  The  merchants  then  asked  for  legislation  in  Eng- 
land.''^ Nicholson,  the  second  royal  governor  in  Maryland, 
heard  of  this  proposal  and  represented  to  the  secretary  of 
state  the  colonial  side  of  the  case.  He  said  that  "  a  total 
prohibition  of  it  may  very  much  lessen  the  quantity  by  dis- 
couraging the  North  and  West  Country  vessels  from  coming 
for  it,  and  bringing  their  Country  Commoditys.  .  .  .  And  if 
the  Officers  and  seamen  be  not  allowed  to  bulk  tobacco,  I 
suppose  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  have  them  come  to  these 
parts,  for  it  is  a  very  slavish  voyage."*'*  As  the  Assembly, 
moved  by  this  or  other  considerations,  still  refused  to  act, 
Parliament  finally  settled  the  question  in  1699  by  prohibiting 
the  importation  of  tobacco  in  bulk  into  England.''^  Legally, 
then,  the  all-powerful  merchant  class  had  secured  what  it 
wanted,  although  Robert  Quary  complained  as  late  as  1703 
that  tobacco  was  still  shipped  in  bulk.^** 

Moreover,  the  packed  tobacco  did  not  escape  being  made 
the  subject  of  controversy  between  the  merchants  in  London 
and  the  planters  in  Maryland.  In  1692  a  local  statute  fixed 
the  size  of  tobacco  hogsheads  at  forty-four  inches  in  length 
by  thirty-one  in  the  head,*'^  but  in  1694***  and  again  in  1699, 

59  C.  O.  5 :  719,  18,  Bundle  3. 

^0  Treasury  Papers,  xvii,  71. 

'^i  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2300;  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  335- 

62  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  90. 

6"  Privj'  Council  Register,  75,  p.  84. 

64  C.  O.  5 :  719.  18,  Bundle  3. 

65  10  William  III,  c.  10. 

66  C.  O.  5 :  1262,  48. 

6^  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  552. 
6s  Ibid.,  vol.  xix,  p.  104. 

7 


98  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [54O 

1700,  and  1704*^"  their  gauge  was  declared  to  be  forty-eight  by 
thirty-two  inches,  a  size  shghtly  larger  than  that  of  the  Vir- 
ginia hogshead. '"  The  ship-captains  obj  ected  to  the  large  size 
of  these  casks  and  systematically  cut  and,  in  the  language  of 
the  colonial  records,  squeezed  them  to  make  them  fit  into  the 
holds  of  their  ships.  This  was  a  great  grievance  to  the  planters, 
for  the  quality  of  the  tobacco  was  often  injured  in  the  squeez- 
ing process.  In  self-defense  they  passed  a  law  in  1707  to 
accompany  the  latest  measure  regulating  the  size  of  casks. 
By  this  bill  masters  were  prohibited  under  a  very  severe 
penalty  from  "  Cropping,  Cutting  or  Defacing  Tobacco " 
taken  on  board  ship.'^  The  London  merchants  strongly 
urged  the  home  government  to  repeal  these  two  laws,  mainly 
on  the  ground  that  the  increase  in  the  size  of  the  hogshead, 
taken  in  connection  with  the  prohibition  of  squeezing,  re- 
duced the  capacity  of  the  ships.'^  They  also  insisted  that 
the  penalty  on  the  planters  for  exceeding  the  size  of  a  hogs- 
head, which  was  comparatively  light,"^  and  that  on  the  ship- 
master for  squeezing  his  lading,  which  was  far  heavier, 
should  be  made  the  same.  The  obnoxious  laws  were  imme- 
diately repealed  by  the  Privy  Council,'^*  and  Governor  Sey- 
mour was  enjoined  to  have  the  Assembly  pass  a  new  meas- 
ure making  the  size  of  Maryland  casks  conformable  with 
those  of  Virginia  and  equalizing  the  penalties  imposed  upon 
ship-captains  and  planters.'^  The  governor,  however,  was 
unable  '*  to  Winn  their  complyance  to  any  the  least  of  her 
Maj'^  Just  and  reasonable  commands."'*^  Instead  of  passing 
a  law,  the  members  of  the  legislature  petitioned  the  queen 
that  they  be  allowed  to  retain  the  larger  sized  hogshead  on 

*^9  Archives,  vol.  xxii,  p.  560;  vol.  xxiv,  p.  106;  vol.  xxvi,  p.  331- 

'oThe  Virginia  hogshead  was  48x30  inches  (Hening,  vol.  iii,  pp. 
435-437).  The  size  which  the  English  merchants  wished  to  see 
adopted  in  Maryland  was  46x28  inches  (C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  67). 

'■I  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  157. 

72  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  49,  H.  67. 

■^3  The  penalty  on  the  planter  was  six  shillings,  whereas  that  on 
the  ship-captain  was  three  pounds. 

74  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  547- 

75  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  246;  C.  O.  5 :  "72"],  pp.  39-45- 

76  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  97- 


541  ]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT    TRADE  99 

the  plea  that  their  tobacco  could  not  be  packed  as  tightly  as 
that  of  Virginia  without  suffering  deterioration."  The 
Board  of  Trade  considered  the  petition  but  remained  firm  in 
its  support  of  the  London  merchants,'^  and  the  provincial 
legislature  was  finally  compelled  to  yield.'''  Edward  Lloyd 
said  that  this  compliance  was  "  Gained  with  great  dificulty, 
many  of  the  Delegates,  persisting  in  their  oppinion,  that  our 
Bright  oranoca  Tobacco  required  larger  Casque,  than  the 
Tobacco  usually  made  in  Virginia."®'' 

The  London  merchants  also  attempted  to  interfere  in  the 
control  and  development  of  the  tobacco  trade  on  the  Eng- 
lish side  of  the  water.  Again  and  again  they  brought  before 
Parliament  and  the  Board  of  Trade  long  representations  on 
the  condition  of  the  tobacco  trade  in  England  and  on  the  Con- 
tinent.*^ While  it  is  impossible  to  determine  exactly  the  ex- 
tent of  their  influence  in  shaping  governmental  policy,  there 
was  certainly  in  some  important  instances  a  striking  simi- 
larity between  their  petitions  and  the  course  subsequently 
followed.  For  example,  they  complained  of  defects  in  the 
administration  of  the  customs  acts  which  increased  the  bur- 
den already  imposed  upon  the  trade  by  the  high  rate  of 
duties  in  England.®-     In   1713,  after  numerous  efforts  on 

^'^  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  279-281,  465;  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  97. 

78  C.  O.  5 :  ^2■/,  pp.  245-250. 

^■9  Archives,  vol.  xxix,  pp.  5,  39,  40,  74. 

80  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  59.  In  1715  the  Maryland  Assembly  made 
another  attempt  to  increase  the  size  of  the  casks.  The  small  gauge 
having  been  found  to  "  tend  to  the  ruin  of  "  honest  traders,  it  was 
increased  by  law  to  48x32  inches.  A  discussion  of  the  results  of 
this  attempt  would  take  us  outside  of  our  period,  but  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  the  will  of  the  moneyed  classes  was  what  finally  decided  the 
controversy  (Archives,  vol.  xxx,  p.  348). 

81  The  references  for  these  representations  of  the  merchants  may 
be  found  below  in  the  detailed  discussion  of  their  influence  on  English 
and  continental  trade  in  tobacco. 

82  A  copy  of  a  proposed  draught  of  an  act  regulating  the  tobacco 
trade.  (No  date.)  This  draught  embodies  all  kinds  of  regulations 
for  the  importation  of  tobacco  ;  administration  of  the  customs  ;  regu- 
lations for  manufacturing  tobacco;  suggestions  that  it  be  sold  only 
in  London,  etc.  (Harleian  MSS.  1238,  f.  2,7,  British  Museum).  A 
presentment  from  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  to  the  Lords 
of  the  Treasury.  A  statement  that  part  of  the  duties  on  tobacco 
and  sugar  was  being  lost  to  the  king  on  account  of  the  lax  admin- 


lOO  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [542 

their  part,  new  regulations  were  adopted.^^  The  time 
allowed  for  payment  of  duties  was  extended,  greater  allow- 
ances for  waste  and  shrinkage  were  made,  the  temporary 
hardships  of  certain  vessels  laden  with  tobacco  then  in  the 
Thames  were  relieved,  and  the  drawbacks  on  reexport  were 
regulated. 

Of  the  tobacco  imported  into  England  less  than  one  third 
was  consumed  there,  the  remainder  being  reexported.^*  By 
the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  large  markets  for  planta- 
tion tobacco  had  been  opened  in  Holland,  France,  the  Baltic 
countries,  Spain,  Ireland,  and  other  parts  of  Europe.^^  Eng- 
land exported  to  Spain,  for  example,  in  1699,  2,122,657 
pounds  of  tobacco;  the  following  year,  2,558,298  pounds; 
and  from  1712  to  1714,  1,839,483  pounds. ^'^  The  exports  to 
Holland  and  the  Baltic  were  even  larger  than  this,  in  both 
leaf  and  manufactured  tobacco.  In  all  this  trade  to  the 
Continent  the  London  merchants,  naturally,  were  most  prom- 
inently concerned.  They  followed  every  fluctuation  in  the 
sale  of  colonial  tobacco  in  foreign  countries.  In  1697  and 
1698  they  petitioned  for  advantages  in  the  tobacco  trade 
with  Russia, ^^  and  a  year  or  two  later  the  Board  of  Trade 
reported  to  the  House  of  Commons  that  the  English  minis- 
ter at  the  Hague  had  treated  with  the  czar  for  this  purpose.^® 

Shortly  after  this,  certain  English  merchants,  evidently 
not  in  the  powerful  London  group,  attempted  to  get  a  mo- 
nopoly on  manufacturing  plantation  and  Russian  tobacco  in 
Russia.*^     The  Board  of  Trade,  reporting  on  a  petition  pre- 

istration  of  the  custom  house  and  that  no  due  care  was  being  taken 
of  the  bonds.  It  recommends  in  detail  various  ways  in  which  this 
state  of  affairs  may  be  remedied  (Treasury  Papers,  xxix,  25).  Pro- 
posalls  concerning  building  of  Towns  in  Virginia.  Proposalls  con- 
cerning the  Custome  of  Tobacco  (Egerton  MSS.  2395,  ff.  666,  667, 
British  Museum.     No  date). 

s^C.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  159;  13  Anne,  c.  8. 

8*C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  19. 

85  House  of  Lords  MSS.,  June  5,  i/M;  Egerton  MSS.  921,  f.  9  ff-. 
British  Museum;  C.  O.  5 :  1315.  N.  19. 

86  C.  O.  390:  8. 

87  C.  O.  5  :  1309,  25,  43- 

88  Sloane  MSS.  2902,  f.  5,  British  Museum. 

89  C.  O.  5:  1314,  M.  18,  M.  19,  M.  20.  A  petition  of  the  Virginia 
merchants  against  the  "  contractors  with  the  Czar  of  Muscovy,"  as 
they  called  the  other  group. 


543]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  10 1 

sented  to  the  Privy  Council  by  the  London  merchants,  rec- 
ommended that  this  attempted  monopoly  be  stopped  as 
injurious  to  English  trade  and  "  against  the  interest  and 
usage  of  the  kingdom."  The  Privy  Council  thereupon  or- 
dered the  proper  steps  to  be  taken  to  prevent  its  continu- 
ance.°^  Further  efforts  were  also  made  by  the  merchants 
to  keep  open  to  all  the  trade  with  Russia  in  plantation 
tobacco.®^ 

The  trade  with  Russia  was  but  one  example  of  the  way 
in  which  the  men  most  interested  kept  track  of  continental 
conditions.  From  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century 
the  merchants  realized  that  the  exportation  of  tobacco  to 
the  Continent  was  seriously  decreasing,  principally  because 
of  the  war  which  cut  off  many  markets  from  English  mer- 
chants. The  trade  with  France  was  almost  entirely  monop- 
olized by  the  Dutch,  who  had  begun  to  grow  and  to  manufac- 
ture large  quantities  to  supply  the  French  market.''-  The 
growing  of  tobacco  in  different  parts  of  Germany  and  also 
in  Hungary  was  largely  increased  during  these  years,  and  the 
demand  for  plantation  tobacco  was  thereby  lessened. ^^  The 
exportations  to  Spain  were  seriously  diminished,^'*  and  the 
troubles  in  the  northern  countries  injured  the  trade  to  the 
Baltic. ^^  Many  remedies  were  suggested  to  improve  this 
condition  of  affairs,  both  by  the  London  merchants  and  by 
others  interested  in  the  tobacco  trade.  Robert  Ouary,  the 
surveyor  of  the  customs  for  the  middle  colonies,  suggested 
that  a  careful  inspection  be  made  of  the  conditions  under 
which  tobacco  was  grown  and  manufactured  in  Holland,  in 
order  to  counteract  the  Dutch  schemes  to  monopolize  the 
trade.'*''    The  London  merchants  and  tobacco  manufacturers, 

90  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  487 ;  C.  O.  5  :  1314,  M.  47. 

91  C.  O.  5:  131S,  N.  7. 

92  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  19,  N.  29,  82  (ii-v  inc.),  87;  C.  O.  5:  7i6,  H. 
75;  C.  O.  5:  3,  February  2,  1705/6;  Treasury  Papers,  ex,  33. 

93  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  19;  House  of  Lords  MSS.,  June  5,  1714. 

94  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  29;  C.  O.  5:  716.  H.  75;  C.  O.  5:  3,  February 

2,  1705/6. 

93  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  75;  C.  O.  5:  1315.  N.  29,  82  (vii),  87;  C.  O.  5: 

3,  February  2,  1705/6;  Egerton  MSS.  921,  f.  9,  British  Museum. 
96  C.  O.  5:  3,  112. 


I02  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [544 

in  elaborate  papers  presented  to  the  government,  asked 
among  other  things  that  definite  encouragement  be  given  to 
the  manufacturers  of  tobacco  in  England,  that  the  royal  navy 
be  allowed  to  use  only  tobacco  manufactured  there,  and  that 
the  English  envoys  at  the  courts  of  Spain,  Russia,  Sweden, 
and  other  places  be  instructed  to  gain  favorable  conditions 
for  the  importation  of  the  plantation  product.^"  As  the  loss 
of  the  French  market  was  perhaps  the  greatest  blow  of  all, 
the  suggestion  was  made  several  times  from  about  1706  that, 
notwithstanding  the  war,  tobacco  be  carried  to  France  in 
neutral  ships.^^  The  Privy  Council,  on  the  advice  of  the 
Board  of  Trade,  adopted  this  remedy.^^  In  fact,  the  policy 
of  the  government  in  these  matters  generally  followed  the 
wishes  of  the  London  merchants. ^^'^ 

We  know,  furthermore,  that  this  same  group  of  men  at- 
tempted to  give  advice  on  political  afifairs  in  Maryland.  In  at 
least  two  cases  they  recommended  to  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
the  Privy  Council  a  proper  person  for  the  office  of  governor. 
They  actually  stated  that  they  had  chosen  one  man  because 
he  would  serve  their  trade  interests,  or,  as  they  expressed  it, 
because  he  was  a  man  "  of  integrity,  ability,  and  well-versed 
in  the  trade  and  constitution  of  that  province.''^'^^  Doubtless 
there  were  other  cases  in  which  they  recommended  officials 
for  both  Maryland  and  Virginia,  but  there  is  no  evidence 
that  their  recommendations  were  accepted.  Their  advice 
with  regard  to  the  government  of  the  colonies  was  probably 
considered  less  valuable  than  that  on  the  economic  situation. 

Many  of  the  richer  planters  shipped  their  tobacco  directly 
to  certain  firms  in  England  and  received  in  exchange  their 

97  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  32,  82  (i),  87;  C.  O.  5:  3,  121;  Egerton  MSS. 
921,  f.  10,  British  Museum. 

98  C.  O.  5:  1315,  N.  32;  CO.  5:  3,  112,  153;  Add.  MSS.  10453,  ff- 
347,  348,  British  Museum. 

93  C.  O.  5:  3,  121;  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  536. 

1°''  Another  case  in  point  is  a  law  of  1707  decreeing  that  only 
plantation  tobacco  be  sold  in  the  royal  navy  (6  Anne,  c.  50). 

^"1  C.  O.  5 :  727,  p.  312;  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I-  56;  Privy  Council  Register, 
79,  p.  264;  Privy  Council  Papers,  Unbound  packets,  Bundle  1702,  2. 
Neither  one  of  the  two  men  recommended  in  these  references  was 
made  governor  of  Maryland. 


545]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  IO3 

own  consignments  of  European  goods."-  When  a  full  order 
of  goods  was  not  wanted,  they  often  drew  bills  of  exchange 
payable  by  their  merchants  in  England.  They  were  apt  to 
overdraw  their  accounts  and  to  fall  into  debt  to  the  firms 
with  which  they  traded."^ 

The  poorer  planters  did  not  raise  enough  tobacco  to  pay 
for  the  expense  of  shipping  it  to  England.  The  English  mer- 
chants had  to  buy  it  while  it  was  still  in  the  colony,  and  to 
pay  for  it  with  goods  sent  to  Maryland  at  their  own  risk. 
Under  these  circumstances  they  did  not  try  to  sell  their  im- 
ported cargoes  at  once,  because  they  might  have  to  sell  at  a 
loss.  The  profit  of  the  Virginia  voyage,  after  making  allow- 
ance for  the  wages  and  victualling  of  the  sailors  and  for  the 
dangers  of  loss  at  sea  or  capture  by  the  enemy,  was  not  large 
enough  to  risk  any  additional  losses.  Instead,  therefore,  of 
attempting  to  sell  immediately  the  English  traders  usually 
employed  factors  or  merchants  in  the  colony  to  whom  their 
cargoes  were  consigned,  to  be  disposed  of  gradually  at  prof- 
itable prices.  These  factors  represented  the  interests  of 
their  employers  in  disposing  of  their  ventures  of  European 
goods,  in  receiving  and  shipping  tobacco  paid  in  return,  and 
in  looking  after  the  payment  of  all  money  or  bills  due  the 
merchants."^  The  depots  for  the  sale  of  European  goods 
kept  by  the  factors  or  by  other  merchants  representing  Eng- 
lish interests  took  the  form  of  regular  stores,  wdiich  must 
have  been  a  feature  of  Maryland  as  well  as  of  Virginia  life 
at  the  close  of  the  century."^  Their  significance  was  shown 
when,  with  the  object  of  further  exploiting  the  towns,  it  was 
made  the  law  during  Seymour's  administration  that  stores 
kept  by  merchants  and  factors  trading  in  the  province  had 


102  Add.  MSS.  22265,  f-  102,  British  Museum.  For  a  detailed  dis- 
cussion of  conditions  of  exchange  in  Virginia  see  Bruce,  vol.  ii,  ch. 
xvi.  The  situation  in  Maryland  was  similar  to  that  in  Virginia,  but 
material  bearing  directly  on  the  system  of  exchange  in  the  former 
colony  is  hard  to  find. 

10^  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  46;  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  45- 

104  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  72;  vol.  xxv,  p.  74;  vol.  xx,  p.  550. 

105  For  a  discussion  of  the  stores  in  Virginia  see  Bruce,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  381-385.  The  material  available  for  the  history  of  the  local  store 
in  Maryland  is  very  scanty. 


104  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [54^ 

to  be  in  the  towns  marked  out  by  the  Assembly. ^^"^  That 
inhabitants  of  the  country  also  kept  stores  is  indicated  by  a 
complaint  made  about  the  same  time  that  merchants  resid- 
ing in  the  country  were  not  subject  to  this  law/*^'  The  poor 
planters  probably  fell  in  debt  to  these  storekeepers  in  the 
colony  as  frequently  as  their  richer  neighbors  to  the  English 
merchants.  "These  Gentlemen,"  said  Quary  to  the  Board 
of  Trade,  "  take  care  to  Supply  the  poorer  Sort  with  Pro- 
visions— goods  and  necessarys,  and  are  Sure  to  keep  them 
allways  in  Debt,  and  consequently  dependant  on  them.""^ 

When  goods  w'ere  brought  over  in  this  latter  way  to  be 
sold  in  stores,  it  was  part  of  the  colonial  idea  of  fair  trade 
that  such  goods  should  not  be  bought  up  wholesale  by  the 
"  Covetous  &  active  presort  of  people,"  who  would  sell  them 
again  to  the  inhabitants  at  a  higher  price.^^^  It  was  the  old 
fear  that  Englishmen  had  had  from  the  time  of  Edward  III 
that  the  "middlemen  gained  at  the  expense  of  the  public; 
and  it  seemed  to  follow  that  if  middlemen  did  not  gain,  the 
public  would  be  put  to  less  expense."""  Edward  III  pre- 
vented English  merchants  from  buying  or  forestalling  wine 
in  Gascony  before  it  was  imported  into  England."^  In  the 
reign  of  Edward  VI  a  general  law  was  passed  against  buying 
up  corn,  wine,  fish,  and  so  forth."-  The  colonists  in  Mary- 
land, as  in  the  other  colonies,  were  but  following  their  in- 
herited ideas  of  fair  trade  when  they  tried  to  prevent  the 
forestalling  and  regrating  of  European  goods  imported  into 
the  province.  The  practice  was  forbidden  by  law  as  essen- 
tially unfair  to  the  ordinary  planter  who  expected  to  pur- 

1*5^  Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  247,  248. 

107  C.  O.  5:  7^6,  H.  94. 

108  C.  O.  5:  1314,  M.  62.  In  1710  Edward  Lloyd  complained  that 
the  country  merchants  had  advanced  200  per  cent  on  the  price  of 
their  commodities  and  were  refusing  to  take  tobacco  in  payment 

(c.  o.  5: 717,1.46). 

109  Archives,  vol.  vii,  p.  253. 

110  W.  Cunningham,  The  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Com- 
merce during  the  Early  and  Middle  Ages,  4th  ed.,  p.  319. 

111  27  Edward  III,  Stat.  I,  c.  5-/. 

112  5  and  6  Edward  VI,  c.  14. 


547]  TRADE    ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT    TRADE  I05 

chase  directly  from  the  factor.^^-''  On  the  other  hand,  a 
too  rigid  enforcement  of  this  law  would  have  been  very 
hard  on  the  merchants  who  wished  to  dispose  of  their  cargo 
quickly,  so  forestalling  and  regrating  were  often  practised 
in  the  colony.^^'* 

The  general  prevalence  of  the  system  of  direct  exchange 
of  the  Maryland  staple  for  the  goods  wanted  from  England 
almost  obviated  the  necessity  for  money  as  a  medium  of  ex- 
change. It  was  only  in  the  local  trade  that  the  need  of  a 
money  exchange  was  actually  felt,  and  it  has  been  shown  that 
for  this  purpose  there  was  some  coin  in  Maryland  brought 
in  through  the  West  Indian  trade.  Laws  were  enacted  from 
time  to  time  to  fix  the  value  of  foreign  coins  and  so  regu- 
late local  trading.^^^  These  tentative  efforts  ended  in  1708 
with  the  law  passed  to  conform  to  the  English  proclama- 
tion making  the  value  of  foreign  coins  uniform  in  all  the 
colonies.^^°  Such  coin  was  used  solely  for  what  Hugh  Jones 
in  his  letter  called  "  pocket  expenses,"^^'^  and  all  trading  on 
a  large  scale  was  done  in  terms  of  tobacco  or  by  bills  of 
exchange. 

Bills  of  exchange  were  drawn  in  Maryland  by  planters  or 
by  ship-captains  on  tobacco  merchants.  "  This  instrument 
was  only  used  when  the  party  who  gave  it  had  a  balance  to 
his  credit  in  the  hands  of  some  merchant,  the  drawee  being 
generally  a  person  of  this  calling  who  resided  in  England, 
New  England,  Barbadoes,  or  in  one  of  the  other  English 
colonies. "^^^     For  instance,  the  English  government  more 

^13  Laws  against  forestalling  and  regrating  were  often  passed  in 
the  colony  (Archives,  vol.  i,  pp.  161,  294,  351;  vol.  ii,  p.  131;  vol.  vii, 
P-  253;  vol.  xiii,  pp.  526,  544;  vol.  xxii,  p.  558;  vol.  xxiv,  p.  104;  vol. 
xxvi,  p.  323).  The  act  of  1704  was  disapproved  by  the  attorney- 
general  in  England  as  defective  in  construction  and  as  unreasonable 
because  no  exceptions  were  allowed  (C.  O.  S:  716,  H.  48). 

11*  At  one  time,  for  instance,  Edward  Randolph  reported  a  ship- 
master to  the  Council  for  having  broken  his  cargo  to  trade  con- 
trary to  this  law,  but  because  of  the  damage  which  would  result  to 
the  colony  if  he  were  protested  he  was  allowed  to  continue  trading 
(Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  129). 

115  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  286;  vol.  xiii,  pp.  142,  493. 

116  Ibid.,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  350. 

117  Royal  Society,  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 
lis  Bruce,  vol.  ii,  p.  516. 


I06  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [548 

than  once  requested  Maryland  to  share  the  expenses  in- 
curred in  defending  New  York  in  the  Indian  wars.  At  least 
once  this  sum  was  paid  to  New  York  in  bills  of  exchange 
drawn  on  English  merchants  by  masters  of  ships  who  had 
given  them  to  the  colony  in  payment  for  duties.  The 
province  sent  these  bills  to  New  York,  and  from  there  they 
finally  went  to  England  to  be  cashed.^ ^^  In  the  circuitous 
travels  of  these  bills  and  the  long  time  that  elapsed  before 
they  were  presented  for  redemption  the  balance  to  the  credit 
of  the  drawer  was  often  overdrawn  and  the  bills  were  pro- 
tested.^-°  In  Virginia  as  well  as  in  Maryland  it  was  found 
necessary  to  impose  a  heavy  penalty  on  the  drawer  of  a  bill 
which  came  back  protested.  In  the  latter  colony  from  1682 
damages  of  twenty  per  cent  of  the  value  of  the  bill  were  ex- 
acted besides  its  payment  and  the  cost  of  the  suit.^-^  In  1708 
the  damages  were  lessened  on  the  representation  of  the  As- 
sembly that  they  were  so  high  that  merchants  were  tempted 
to  protest  bills  even  when  they  had  the  money  with  which  to 
discharge  them.^--  The  merchants,  as  in  so  many  other  cases, 
objected  to  this  change  in  the  law,  and  the  Privy  Council  re- 
pealed it.^-'^     In  1715,  therefore,  the  damage  on  protested 

11^  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  16,  48,  49,  71.  In  another  case  Peter 
Paggen,  the  agent  for  Maryland,  told  the  Privy  Council  that  he  had 
received  bills  by  order  of  the  Convention  of  Maryland  drawn  in  the 
same  way  by  masters  of  ships  on  their  correspondents  in  England  in 
discharge  of  the  duty  of  two  shillings  per  hogshead  on  tobacco 
(ibid.,  vol.  viii,  p.  281). 

120  For  example,  bills  of  exchange  for  over  £300  sent  to  New 
York  by  Governor  Copley  early  in  the  period  of  royal  government 
were  returned  to  Maryland  as  protested  in  England  (Archives,  vol. 
XX,  pp.  220,  221).  The  Maryland  Council  repudiated  this  whole 
transaction  (ibid.,  p.  235). 

1-1  Ibid.,  vol.  vii,  p.  323;  vol.  xiii,  p.  449;  vol.  xxii,  p.  464;  vol. 
xxvi,  p._356. 

122  Ibid.,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  364. 

1-3  C.  O.  5 :  717,  I.  3.  This  action  of  the  Privy  Council  was  due 
to  the  representations  of  the  Board  of  Trade.  "  By  this  Law,  the 
Persons  who  take  Bills  of  Exchange  will  not  get  common  Interest, 
for  their  Money,  in  case  the  Bills  be  protested,  for  it  often  happens 
that  it  is  18  Months  or  Two  Years  from  the  time  of  drawing  such 
Bills  before  they  can  be  returned,  and  the  payment  Demanded,  These 
are  Hardships  which  the  Merchants  here  complain  of"  (C.  O.  5: 
727,  p.  141).  It  would  appear,  therefore,  in  this  particular  case  at 
least,  that  the  recommendation  of  the  Board  of  Trade  was  based 
directly  on  the  complaint  of  the  London  merchant. 


549]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  10/ 

bills  of  exchange  was  again  raised  to  twenty  per  cent/-*  In 
spite  of  all  difficulties,  however,  most  large  payments  in  both 
public  and  private  transactions  were  made  by  bills  of 
exchange. 

Regarding  the  trade  routes  of  the  colony  elsewhere  than 
to  England  but  little  need  be  said.  When  negroes  began  to 
be  imported  into  Maryland  and  Virginia  in  large  numbers, 
the  English  ships  primarily  concerned  in  the  tobacco  trade 
sometimes  varied  their  voyages  to  increase  the  profits.  They 
sailed  first  to  the  Guinea  coast,  where  they  bought  ne- 
groes to  exchange  in  Virginia  or  Maryland  for  cargoes  of 
tobacco. ^^'^  Governor  Seymour  wrote  in  1708  that  before 
1698  few  negroes  had  been  brought  directly  from  Africa, 
most  of  them  being  imported  in  small  lots  from  the  island 
colonies.  Since  then,  however,  the  trade  had  "  run  high," 
but  it  was  being  carried  on  exclusively  by  separate  traders, 
the  Royal  African  Company  not  having  supplied  one  negro 
to  the  province  during  the  decade.  It  was  his  opinion  that 
if  separate  traders  were  to  be  excluded  the  supply  would  so 
decrease  that  the  colony  would  suffer  greatly.^^*'  To  show 
the  extent  of  this  trade  he  enclosed  two  lists,  one  for  all 
importations  of  negroes  between  1698  and  1707  and  the  other 
for  1708.^-^  All  but  two  of  the  ships  named  in  these  lists 
were  from  London,  showing  the  general  line  of  trade;  the 
other  two  imported  negroes  from  Barbadoes.  Governor 
Seymour  also  stated  that  there  was  no  Maryland  shipping 
employed  in  this  trade,^-^  which  was,  therefore,  practically 
confined  to  English  vessels  not  connected  with  the  Royal 
African  Company. 

This  trade,  although  in  a  way  bringing  into  Maryland  an 

121  Archives,  vol.  xxx,  p.  243. 

125  Privy  Council  Register,  76,  May,  1697,  to  December,  1699. 
This  volume  of  the  Register  contains  numerous  permissions  given 
to  English  ships  to  sail  to  Guinea. 

126  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  91. 

12-  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  92,  H.  93;  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  257. 

128  In  1693  Richard  Hill,  master  of  the  Hope  of  Maryland,  was 
forbidden  to  make  the  voyage  to  Guinea  on  account  of  the  monop- 
oly of  the  Royal  African  Company  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  117). 


I08  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [SS© 

import  from  a  foreign  country,  was  entirely  in  the  hands 
of  Enghsh  shipping.  As  negroes  were  ahnost  the  only  im- 
portant foreign  commodity,  there  was  naturally  no  reason 
for  the  presence  of  any  really  foreign  shipping  in  the  colo- 
nial ports.  Edward  Randolph  wrote  in  1698  to  the  Board 
of  Trade  that  there  were  many  Scottish  merchants  in  Penn- 
sylvania, Virginia,  and  Maryland,  but  his  zeal  for  the  ob- 
servance of  the  Acts  of  Trade  conveys  a  somewhat  exagger- 
ated impression  of  the  extent  of  this  trade,  at  least  in  Mary- 
land.^-^  Between  1689  and  1699  there  are  eleven  definite 
records  of  vessels  bound  for  or  from  Scotland  directly. 
About  twenty-five  ships  in  addition  during  those  years  were 
supposed  to  have  been  concerned  in  the  same  trade. ^■''*'  In 
1707  trade  with  Scotland  was  legalized,  but  there  are  no 
records  to  indicate  that  this  route  ever  became  very  popular. 
In  1703  the  Maryland  Council  reported  that  the  colony 
had  no  trade  at  all  with  the  French  settlements  in  America,^^^ 
and  a  little  later  Governor  Seymour  stated  that  there  was 
no  one  in  Maryland  who  dared  take  advantage  of  the  queen's 
permission  to  open  up  trade  with  the  Spanish  colonies.^^-  The 
small  amount  of  corn  sent  to  Lisbon  was  probably  carried 
in  plantation  ships,  no  Portuguese  vessels  coming  into  Mary- 
land.^^^  The  trade  with  Madeira  and  the  Azores  was  also 
conducted  for  the  most  part  in  ships  owned  and  built  in 
the  plantations,  although  occasionally  an  English  vessel 
stopped  at  the  islands  on  the  way  to  Maryland. ^^*  The  trade 
to  foreign  countries,  on  the  whole,  was  extremely  small,  em- 

129  C.  O.  5:  1258,  26  (ii). 

130  See  Chapter  III,  pages  118,  119,  for  a  detailed  statement  of  the 
ships  in  this  trade. 

131  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  p.  163. 

132  C.  O.  5 :  209,  p.  13,  February  23,  1703/4,  A  copy  of  the  circular 
letter  from  the  secretary  of  state  giving  permission  for  this  trade; 
C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  14;  C.  O.  5:  3,  23,  23  (i). 

133  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  63,  I.  106. 

134  The  Naval  Office  Lists  (C.  O.  5:  749)  show  several  instances 
of  plantation-owned  ships  trading  to  the  islands,  and  at  least  two 
cases  where  the  ships  were  owned  in  England.  See  also  C.  O.  5  • 
716,  H.  74,  and  Sloane  MSS.  2291,  British  Museum.  In  the  latter 
reference  mention  is  made  of  a  New  England  ship  bound  from 
Fyall  to  Maryland. 


55l]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  IO9 

ploying  practically  no  foreign  shipping  and  but  few  planta- 
tion vessels. 

The  colonial  authorities  often  commented  in  general  terms 
on  Maryland's  trade  with  the  other  English  colonies.  In  1697 
they  said  that  there  was  little  traffic  of  this  sort  and  that  the 
little  done  was  in  small  craft  belonging  either  to  the  province 
or  to  New  England. ^^^  Again,  in  1708  Governor  Seymour 
wrote  that  the  trade  of  Maryland-built  ships  was  confined  to 
the  West  Indies  and  the  Azores.^^"  A  record  of  the  Virginia 
Council  of  October,  1708,  shows  that  Virginia  was  trading 
in  that  year  to  a  small  extent  with  Barbadoes,  New  England, 
New  York,  Pennsylvania,  South  Carolina,  and  Bermuda, 
in  ships  belonging  to  the  colonies  named.^""  The  condi- 
tions in  the  two  colonies  were  much  the  same.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  Barbadoes  and  New  England  were  the  most  im- 
portant trading  centers  and  that  the  carrying  for  all  inter- 
colonial traffic  was  largely  done  by  outsiders.  From  the 
Naval  Office  Records,  moreover,  a  list  of  vessels  concerned 
in  the  intercolonial  trade  may  actually  be  compiled.  As 
printed  below,  this  list  will  show  the  number  of  ships  found 
in  Maryland,  the  colonies  where  they  were  owned,  and  the 
ports  from  which  they  had  sailed  and  to  which  they  were 
bound.     A  dash  is  used  where  these  ports  are  not  known.^^^ 

135  Archives,  vol.  xix,  p.  540. 

136  C.  O.  5 :  716,  H.  74- 

137  c.  O.  5:  1316,  O.  25.  The  Council,  however,  said:  "There's 
very  little  Trade  carryed  on  by  the  Inhabitants  of  this  Colony  to 
any  of  her  Majestys  plantations." 

138  It  has  already  been  explained  that  the  lists  are  not  accurate, 
but  general  conclusions  may  certainly  be  drawn  from  calculations 
based  on  them.  Moreover,  there  is  no  indication  of  any  increase  in 
the  amount  of  the  plantation  trade  between  1700  and  171S,  so  the 
years  to  1700  covered  by  the  Naval  Office  Lists  may  fairly  be  taken  as 
indicative  of  the  amount  of  plantation  shipping  for  the  whole  period 
of  royal  government. 


no 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[552 


Ownership 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Barbadoes 

New  York  _ 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 


New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
Maryland 
Maryland 
Barbadoes 
Barbadoes 
Virginia 


New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
Maryland 
Barbadoes 
New  York 
New  York 
New  York 
Virginia 


New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
Pennsylvania 
Maryland 
Maryland 
Maryland 
New  York 
New  York 
New  York 
Virginia 
Virginia 


From 

In  1690,  26  ships 
New  England 
Barbadoes 
New  England 
New  England 
Maryland 
Maryland 
Barbadoes 
Barbadoes 
New  York  _ 
Pennsylvania 
Virginia 

In  1691,  19  ships 
New  England 


To 


Number 


New  England 

New  England 

Barbadoes 

Maryland 

Barbadoes 

Barbadoes 

Barbadoes 

Virginia 

In  1692,  21  ships 


New  England 
Barbadoes 
New  England 
New  England 


Barbadoes 


New  York 
New  York 
Virginia 


In  1693,  44  ships 


New  England 
New  England 
Barbadoes 
New  England 
Virginia 
Pennsylvania 


Maryland 
Maryland 


New  York 
New  York 


Virginia 


New  England   5 

Barbadoes   i 

Barbadoes    ..T 2 

Jamaica   I 

7 

Virginia   2 

England   i 

Barbadoes    3 

New  York   2 

Pennsylvania    i 

Virginia   i 

New  England    3 

3 

England    i 

Barbadoes    i 

Barbadoes    I 

4 

Barbadoes    2 

Barbadoes    i 

England   2 

Virginia   i 

I 

New  England   4 

England   i 

England   2 

Barbadoes    2 

I 

Barbadoes    i 

I 

New  York 2 

Jamaica    i 

Virginia   5 

2 

New  England    10 

Barbadoes    i 

England   i 

England   2 

New  England   i 

London    i 

7 

Barbadoes    i 

New  England   i 

2 

New  York 7 

Jamaica   i 

I 

Virginia   6 


553] 


TRADE    ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT    TRADE 


I  II 


Ownership 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

Virginia 


New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 


New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 


From 

In   1694,  32  ships 
New  England 
New  England 
Barbadoes 
New  England 
New  England 
Maryland 
Maryland 
Barbadoes 
Maryland 
Pennsylvania 
New  Providence 


To 


Number 


New  York 
New  York 
Barbadoes 
Pennsylvania 
Pennsylvania 


New  York 

In  1695,  24  ships 
New  England 


Madeira 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Barbadoes 

Maryland 


New  York 


Pennsylvania 
Pennsylvania 
Pennsylvania 
New  York 


In  1696,  42  ships 
Barbadoes 
New  England 


Maryland 

Barbadoes 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Mar^'land 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Maryland 


New  England    g 

Barbadoes    i 

New  England   i 

I 

England    i 

Virginia   2 

Pennsylvania    i 

I 

New  England    i 

Barbadoes    i 

Madeira i 

I 

Barbadoes    i 

New  York 2 

England   i 

Pennsylvania    3 

England   i 

2 

Virginia   i 

New  England   4 

2 

Madeira i 

Barbadoes   3 

I 

Pennsylvania    i 

Pennsylvania    i 

I 

New  York 2 

I 

I 

Pennsylvania    2 

New  England    i 

New  York i 

2 

Virginia   i 

New  England    3 

6 

Maryland  i 

Barbadoes   2 

Barbadoes    3 

Virginia    i 

New  York 5 

Liverpool  i 

Maryland  i 

Pennsylvania    I 

Pennsylvania    2 

Virginia   i 

I 

Maryland  i 

I 


112 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[554 


Ownership 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Carolinas 

Carolinas 

Bermuda 

Plantation 


New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

New  York  _ 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Carolinas 

Carolinas 

Bermuda 

Barbadoes 


New  England 
New  England 
Maryland 
New  York  _ 
Pennsylvania 
Virginia 


New  England 
Maryland 
Maryland 
Maryland 


From 


To 


Number 


Virginia 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Carolinas 

New  England 

Bermuda 


Virginia   3 

Pennsylvania    

Virginia    

Barbadoes    

Carolinas   

Maryland  

Providence    


In  1697,  56  ships 
New  England 
New  England 
New  England 
England 
Delaware  Bay 
Virginia 
Maryland 


Maryland 


Fyall 

Barbadoes 
Barbadoes 
Virginia 


New  York 


Maryland 


Pennsylvania 


New  England   5 

7 

England    

England    

S.  Carolina 


Virginia 


Barbadoes 
Maryland 


New  York 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Virginia 

Carolinas 

Carolinas 

Bermuda 

Barbadoes 

In  1698,  10  ships 


New  York 2 

New  York i 

Virginia   i 

Marj'land  i 

London    i 

2 

Pennsylvania    2 

London    i 

New  England    i 

I 

New  England   i 

I 

London    i 

Barbadoes    i 

Virginia   i 


—  2 

Maryland  i 

4 

I 

Pennsylvania    i 

I 


In  1699,  24  ships 
New  England 
New  Providence 
Barbadoes 
Madeira 


New  England   3 

New  Providence  ....  i 

Carolinas   I 

Maryland  i 


555] 


TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE 


113 


Ownership 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

West  Jersey 

Virginia 

Carolinas 

Bermuda 

Jamaica 


New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Plantation 


New  England 

New  England 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

Maryland 

New  York 

Carolinas 

Pennsylvania 

Bermuda 


From 

Carolinas 

New  Providence 

Maryland 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

Barbadoes 

West  Jersey 

Carolinas 

Carolinas 

Bermuda 

Maryland 

In  1700,  15  ships 
New  England 
Port  Lewis 
Maryland 
Barbadoes 


Barbadoes 

Barbadoes 

Carolinas 

New  York 

New  York 

Pennsylvania 

Carolinas 

In  1701,  1  = 
New  England 
New  England 
Barbadoes 
Barbadoes 
Nevis 


ships 


New  York 
Carolinas 
Pennsylvania 
Barbadoes 


To  Number 

Maryland  i 

Madeira i 

Madeira I 

New  York 2 

Maryland  i 

Pennsylvania   3 

.       2 

I 

Carolinas    i 

West  Jersey i 

Virginia   i 

Bermuda    i 

Bermuda    1 

England   i 

New  England   i 

Port  Lewis i 

Barbadoes    i 

Maryland  i 

Port  Lewis  i 

Madeira i 

Barbadoes   i 

Pennsylvania    i 

New  York 3 

England   i 

Pennsylvania    2 

I 

New  England   2 

England    2 

Barbadoes    i 

Maryland   i 

Barbadoes    i 

New  Providence  ....  i 

New  York   3 

Carolinas   i 

Pennsylvania    2 

Barbadoes^^^    i 


The  general  estimates  of  the  colonial  authorities  were  evi- 
dently nearly  correct.  More  boats  came  into  Maryland  from 
New  England  than  from  any  other  place.  Next  to  these 
the  largest  part  of  the  trade  was  actually  done  by  Maryland 
vessels,  as  the  Council  stated.  The  chief  line  of  trade 
in  either  New  England  or  Maryland  vessels  was  that  to  Bar- 
badoes.    Nearly  all  other  voyages  were  made  along  the  coast. 


139  C.  O. 


5:  749,  passim. 


114  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [556 

The  size  of  the  boats  concerned  in  the  plantation  trade  was 
small,  most  of  them  being  sloops  of  from  ten  to  twenty  tons, 
with  a  few  brigantines  of  larger  tonnage.  The  trade  routes 
were  neither  varied  nor  important  and  were  not  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  great  route  to  England. 

It  is  usually  thought  that  Mary  landers  owned  few  or  no 
vessels  of  their  own,  but  this  impression  is  inaccurate.  Be- 
tween 1689  and  1 701,  for  instance,  there  were  definitely 
named  in  the  Naval  Office  Lists  at  least  eighty  boats  from 
Maryland,  three  of  them  registering  over  one  hundred  tons 
and  the  largest  two  hundred. ^*^  In  1697  the  sheriffs  of  the 
colony  w^ere  directed  to  return  lists  of  all  shipping  built, 
building,  or  owned  in  their  respective  counties,  and  of  all 
seafaring  men  living  there.  The  investigation  gave  the  fol- 
lowing results :  In  Anne  Arundel  County  there  were  4  brig- 
antines, 2  built  in  England  and  2  in  the  colony ;  4  ships,  3 
built  apparently  in  England  and  i  in  the  colony ;  8  sloops, 
apparently  all  built  in  the  county ;  1 1  shallops,  belonging  in 
the  county ;  3  commanders ;  and  7  apprentices.  In  Calvert 
County  there  were  8  sloops,  4  shallops,  and  no  seafaring  men  ; 
in  Prince  George's  County,  i  brigantine,  3  sloops,  and  3 
seafaring  men.  In  Baltimore  County  there  were  3  shallops, 
but  no  vessel  was  built  in  the  county.  In  Charles  County 
there  were  3  sloops,  5  shallops,  and  5  seafaring  men,  but  no 
seafaring  boats  were  built  there.  In  St.  Mary's  County 
were  found  4  ships,  i  owned  in  England ;  6  sloops  ;  4  shallops  ; 
and  10  seafaring  men.  In  Somerset  County  the  lists  show 
4  ships,  12  sloops,  12  shallops,  and  2  seafaring  men;  in 
Cecil  County,  i  brigantine,  i  sloop,  6  shallops,  and  no  sea- 
faring men ;  in  Dorchester  County,  3  brigantines,  6  sloops,  3 
shallops,  and  no  seafaring  men.  In  Kent  County  there  were 
4  ships,  I  owned  in  England ;  i  brigantine ;  5  sloops ;  i 
shallop  ;  and  35  seafaring  men.  In  Talbot  County  there  were 
6  pinks,  2  brigantines,  5  ships,  19  sloops,  7  shallops,  and 

i^'*  C.  O.  5 :  749.  In  making  up  this  estimate  a  vessel  which  made 
more  than  one  trip  is  counted  only  once. 


557]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  II 5 

6  seafaring  men.^*^  There  was,  therefore,  a  total  number  of 
i6i  ships,  sloops,  and  shallops,  built  or  building  in  Maryland 
at  the  end  of  the  century.  In  Talbot  County  the  tonnage 
was  given.  Two  ships,  the  sheriff  of  that  county  said, 
registered  four  hundred  tons  and  three  were  rated  at  three 
hundred.  These  figures  are  in  a  measure  borne  out  by  Gov- 
ernor Seymour's  statement  that  good  ships  were  built  in 
Maryland.  He  even  named  one  of  four  hundred  tons,  and 
said  that  several  were  large  enough  to  be  concerned  in  the 
English  trade."^  Most  of  them,  undoubtedly,  were  small. 
Governor  Hart  estimated  in  1720  that  there  were  only  four 
small  brigantines  and  twenty  seagoing  sloops  owned  in 
the  province. ^^^  The  sheriffs'  figures,  however,  make  it  evi- 
dent that  a  good  many  small  vessels  were  owned  and,  in 
most  cases,  built  in  Maryland.  The  Eastern  Shore  counties 
were  more  concerned  in  ship-building  and  in  the  coast 
trade  than  those  of  the  Western  Shore  because  they  ex- 
ported comparatively  little  tobacco  to  England.  The  repre- 
sentatives of  the  colony  were  more  than  eager  that  this  in- 
fant industry  should  be  supported  and  encouraged  by  the 
province.  Throughout  the  whole  period  of  royal  govern- 
ment there  were  enacted  various  laws  remitting,  for  the  en- 
couragement of  inhabitants  building  ships  in  the  province,  the 
duties  on  imports  brought  in  on  native  ships.^**     No  elabo- 

"1  Archives,  vol.  xxv,  pp.  595-601;  C.  O.  5 :  714,  47  (xi),  B.  40, 
The  shallops  included  in  this  list  were  probably  not  counted  in  the 
Naval  Office  figures,  as  they  never  went  out  of  the  colony.  If  that 
is  true,  the  sheriflf's  figures  do  not  vary  greatly  from  those  made 
from  the  Naval  Office  Records.  Omitting  the  shallops,  the  county 
reports  made  up  a  total  of  no  ships  and  sloops  built  or  owned  in 
Maryland. 

^^2  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  74.  Governor  Seymour  said,  however,  that 
not  so  many  ships  were  being  built  at  the  time  when  he  was  writing 
(1708).  "The  Countrey  are  naturally  inclined  to  building  Vessells 
and  the  Natives  take  it  upon  them  Very  readily  but  the  loss  of  their 
Small  Craft  by  the  flfrench  in  trading  to  the  West  Indies  togeather 
with  their  Low  circumstances  not  having  wherewithall  to  procure 
Sailes  Rigging  and  Ironworke  has  not  only  discouragd  but  Totally 
Disabled  them  from  the  Attempt." 

"3  C.  O.  5  :  717,  I-  106. 

1**  Archives,  vol.  xiii,  p.  387 ;  vol.  xix,  pp.  229,  248,  257 ;  vol.  xx, 
p.  411;  vol.  xxvi,  p.  349.  Remission  of  tonnage  duty  for  same  rea- 
son (ibid.,  vol.  xix,  p.  114). 


Il6  MARYLAND   TRADE,,  1689-I715  [558 

rate  merchant  marine  was  developed  in  the  colony  even  as  a 
result  of  this  legislation,  but  the  art  of  ship-building  was 
never  entirely  neglected. 

The  subject  of  trade  routes  and  exchange  cannot  be 
considered  complete  without  an  investigation  of  the  some- 
what difficult  question  of  illicit  trading.  It  is  of  interest  to 
find  out  whether  enough  illegal  trade  was  carried  on  in 
Maryland  to  increase  appreciably  the  total  amount  of  her 
commerce,  and  whether  the  colony  was  in  league  with  any  of 
the  pirates  who  are  known  to  have  traded  in  some  of  the 
other  colonies  in  defiance  of  the  law.  Exact  records  of 
smuggling  operations  were  naturally  never  made  public  by 
the  smugglers,  but  the  men  who  came  into  contact  with  the 
colony  often  recorded  their  impressions  of  the  amount  of 
illegal  trading  done  there.  It  is  on  the  authority  of  these 
opinions  that  answers  to  the  foregoing  queries  must  be 
based. 

As  the  trade  with  England  was  the  most  important,  the 
most  serious  form  of  illegal  trade  would  naturally  be  that 
carried  on  in  defiance  of  the  English  Navigation  Acts.  Ves- 
sels trading  in  the  colony  must  be  of  English  or  colonial 
build,  must  import  foreign  articles  only  through  England, 
and  above  all  must  carry  tobacco,  an  enumerated  commod- 
ity, directly  home  or  to  another  English  plantation.  To 
enforce  these  regulations  all  vessels  had  to  be  registered 
in  England,  their  registry  had  to  be  examined  in  the  colony, 
and  heavy  bond  had  to  be  given  there  for  the  proper  deliv- 
ery of  the  tobacco.  After  1672,  if  the  bond  was  not  given 
for  delivery  in  England,  all  tobacco  paid  a  duty  of  one  penny 
on  the  pound,  and  even  then  it  had  to  be  shipped  only  to  an 
English  plantation.  These  were  the  laws  which  the  Eng- 
lish governors  in  Maryland,  and  especially  the  zealous  Eng- 
lish customs  officials,  complained  were  frequently  broken. 
Edward  Randolph  told  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs, 
for  instance,  that  it  was  the  fraudulent  practice  of  collect- 
ors to  allow  tobacco  to  be  loaded  on  forged  certificates,  for 


559]  TR.\DE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT    TRADE  I  17 

offering  which  there  was  no  penalty  in  the  colony/^"  to  ac- 
cept short  entries  for  the  payment  of  the  penny  a  pound  pro- 
vided masters  purchased  the  collectors'  own  crops  for 
export,"*^  and  to  permit  goods  to  be  imported  directly  from 
foreign  countries.^"  He  asserted,  too,  that  bonds  were 
given  as  security  by  men  of  insufficient  estates  in  the  colony, 
that  they  were  often  falsely  discharged,  as  it  was  hard  to 
get  a  colonial  jury  to  prosecute  a  forfeited  bond,"'^  and  that 
tobacco  was  often  shipped  aboard  New  England  or  other 
plantation  vessels  without  paying  duty  or  giving  any  bond  at 
all.^-'^  Randolph's  bete  noir  was  the  direct  trade  to  Scot- 
land. He  accused  Maryland  of  allowing  Scottish-owned 
vessels  to  trade  freely  in  the  colony  and  to  ship  large  car- 
goes of  tobacco  directly  to  their  native  country. ^^^  Others 
confirmed  Randolph's  testimony  that  tobacco  was  secretly 
shipped  from  the  coIony,^=i  and  the  Commissioners  of  the 
Customs  formally  reported  that  foreign  goods  came  into 
Maryland  often  by  way  of  Newfoundland. ^^2 

While  the  Associators  (1689-1691)  were  in  control  of 
Maryland,  the  general  impression  was  that  these  varied 
forms  of  smuggling  were  frequently  practiced.  Clandestine 
trading  in  Maryland  was  easy,  reported  one  ship-captain  in 
1691.^^3  Before  Governor  Copley  arrived  in  the  following 
year.  Governor  Nicholson  of  Virginia  complained  that  Mary- 
land, being  under  a  loose  government,  crippled  the  neighbor- 
ing colony  where  trade  was  more  strictly  controlled. ^°*  Ed- 
ward Randolph  as  usual  discovered  a  most  serious  state  of 

"5  C.  O.  22Z  :  2,  6. 
"6  C.  O.  222 :  3,  79. 
"7  C.  O.  222  :  2,  6. 
"s  C.  O.  2-22  ■•  2,  6. 

149  C.  O.  222--  2,  6.     See  also  C.  O.  5 :  1257,  26  (viii). 

150  C.  O.  323:  2,  6;  C.  O.  5:  1308.  56;  C.  O.  5:  1258,  26  (iii). 

151  C.  O.  323  :  6,  I.  93.  Robert  Quary  claimed  in  1699/1700  that  a 
great  deal  of  tobacco  was  shipped  openly  from  the  continental  colo- 
nies to  Barbadoes,  where  it  was  repacked  and  was  then  smuggled 
into  England  without  paying  the  duty.  This  would  be  another  way 
of  avoiding  full  payment  of  the  tobacco  duties  in  the  colonies  and 
in  England  (C.  O.  5:  1260,  go  (vi)). 

152  Treasury  Papers,  Ivi,  82;  C.  O.  323:  2,  144  (i). 

153  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  1951. 

154  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1 689-1 692,  2075. 


Il8  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [S^O 

affairs  when  he  arrived  in  the  colony  in  1692.  He  wrote  to 
Governor  Copley  immediately :  "  I  know  there  is  a  great  deal 
to  doe  in  your  parts,  especially  in  the  Eastern  Country  ad- 
joyning  to  Newcastle  ;"^^^  and,  again,  to  the  Commissioners  of 
the  Customs :  "  In  my  last  letter  I  told  you  of  the  number  of 
vessels  trading  illegally. "^^"^  He  constantly  reported  ships 
which  in  one  way  or  another  were  violating  the  Acts  of 
Trade.  A  single  list  contains  nine  vessels,  seven  of  them 
bound  for  Scotland. ^^^  Robert  Quary  claimed  that  Mary- 
land was  infected  by  Pennsylvania's  bad  example. ^^^  Both 
of  these  men  are  known  to  have  been  over-officious  in  their 
zeal,  and  their  reports  are  perhaps  somewhat  exaggerated. 
It  is  certain,  however,  that  between  1691  and  1702  at  least 
thirty-one  vessels  were  definitely  recorded  as  engaged  in 
illegal  trade,  twenty-one  before  1696.^^*^  Almost  all  of  them 
were  seized,  and  eleven  can  be  positively  identified  as  Scot- 
tish or  as  concerned  in  the  direct  trade  with  Scotland.    There 

^^^  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  317. 

156  Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2446. 

1"  C.  O.  5  :  1308,  56. 

158  C.  O.  5  : .  1257,  29. 

15^  The  detailed  list  for  each  year  is  as  follows : — 

Reference 

Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  195 1. 

Cal.  St.  P.  Col.  1689-1692,  2295  ;  Archives, 
vol.  xiii,  pp.  320,  327 ;  C.  O.  323 :  2,  7. 
In  1692  Randolph  asserted  that  there 
were  in  Somerset  County  thirty  sail  of 
Scottish,  Irish,  and  New  England  own- 
ership trading  illegally.  He  said  that 
about  twenty  vessels  had  sailed  in  the 
past  eight  months,  but  he  made  no 
specific  charges  except  against  the  six 
already  recorded  (Cal.  St.  P.  Col. 
1689-1692,  2295). 

1694  12  C.  O.  5:  1308,  56;  C.  O.  323-  2,  7;  Ar- 
chives, vol.  XX,  pp.  64,  65.  Eleven  of 
these  ships  were  almost  certainly  seized 
by  Randolph. 

1695  2  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  309,  322. 

1696  4  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  366,  403,  463,  487. 

1698  2  Archives,  vol.  xxii,  p.  25 ;  vol.  xxiii,  p. 
389. 

1699  3  C.  O.  s:  714,  71  A,  C.  36. 
1702                  I                    C.  O.  5:  745,  p.   13.     Randolph  was  the 

prosecutor  against  this  ship. 


Year 

Number 

1691 
1692 

I 
6 

56i] 


TRADE   ROUTES    AND   ILLICIT    TRADE  I  1 9 


are,  besides,  a  number  of  other  more  or  less  specific  reports 
that  the  illegal  trade  with  Scotland  was  considerable,^^°  but 
the  province  apparently  made  no  attempt  to  communicate 
with  the  Scottish  colony  at  Darien  whose  effect  on  colonial 
trade  was  feared  in  England.^" 

When  the  royal  government  was  once  firmly  established 
after  Governor  Nicholson's  arrival,  smuggling  evidently  be- 
came less  and  less  easy.  The  inhabitants  complained  of  the 
strictness  with  which  trade  was  regulated. ^°-  Governor 
Blakiston  announced  that  "  This  Place  has  formerly  been  a 
Nest  of  foul  and  illegal  Traders."^*'''  Governor  Seymour 
asserted  in  1708  that  very  little  illegal  trade  had  been  carried 
on  since  his  arrival  and  that  the  few  cases  which  had  oc- 
curred had  been  severely  punished."*  In  1708  the  Acts  of 
Trade  were  extended  to  Scotland,  and  the  question  of  trade 

1^°  In  1690  two  ships  from  Virginia  or  Maryland  were  seized  in 
Glasgow  for  unloading  tobacco  not  entered  in  England  (Privy- 
Council  Register,  74,  p.  4).  George  Plater  in  1694  stated  to  the 
Council  that  several  vessels  from  Maryland  had  sailed  directly  to 
Scotland,  whereupon  he  was  ordered  to  put  their  bonds  in  suit 
(Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  65).  Randolph  accused  Nehemiah  Blakiston. 
collector  of  Potomac,  of  allowing  eight  vessels  to  clear  for  Scottish 
ports  about  the  same  time  (C.  O.  323:  2,  7).  In  1695  the  colony 
was  notified  of  four  vessels  to  arrive  from  Scotland  (Archives,  vol. 
XX,  p.  340).  Governor  Nicholson  informed  the  Board  of  Trade, 
March,  1696,  that  Gustavus  Hambleton,  a  ship-master,  was  supposed 
to  have  taken  three  or  four  hundred  hogsheads  of  tobacco  to  Aber- 
deen (C.  O.  5:  714,  i).  In  1696  four  vessels  came  from  Scotland 
with  Scottish  goods  and  two  sailed  thither  from  Maryland  with 
tobacco  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  546;  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  ii,  12).  One  such 
vessel  was  reported  in  1698,  and  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs 
notified  the  governor  of  the  colony  that  ships  were  supposed  to  be 
building  in  Maryland  for  the  Scottish  trade  (ibid.,  vol.  xxiii,  pp. 
328,  329).  And  finally,  in  1699,  three  Scottish  merchants  were  to  be 
apprehended  for  trading  in  the  colony  (ibid.,  vol.  xxv,  p.  73).  None 
of  these  vessels  apparently  was  seized  or  prosecuted  in  Maryland. 
Some  of  these  cases  are  mentioned  in  the  study  by  T.  Keith,  Com- 
mercial Relations  of  England  and  Scotland,  1603-1707,  p.  125. 

161  The  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  sent  a  number  of  letters  to 
Mar>-land  officials  forbidding  any  trade  with  the  Scots  at  Darien, 
letters  which  were  officially  proclaimed  in  the  colony.  There_  is, 
however,  no  notice  of  any  Maryland  vessel  having  sailed  for  Darien, 
though  Blakiston  wrote  that  Pennsylvania  was  supposed  to  have 
fitted  out  some  vessels  for  this  trade  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  345-355; 
C.  O.  S:  719,  3,  Bundle  7). 

1R2  Treasury  Papers,  1,  27,  nos.  6,  8. 

163  C.  O.  5 :  719,  3,  Bundle  7- 

164  C.  O.  S:  716,  H.  74- 


120  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [562 

contrary  to  their  provisions  apparently  ceased  to  be  of  any 
great  importance  in  Maryland  under  the  royal  governors. ^®^ 
All  through  this  period  smuggling,  whether  extensive  or 
not,  was  a  matter  of  great  concern  to  the  English  authorities. 
At  this  time  the  colonial  policy  of  the  Board  of  Trade  was 
well  defined  and  energetically  carried  out.  Every  effort  was 
made  to  ensure  strict  supervision  of  the  commerce  of  Mary- 
land. Proposals  to  prevent  smuggling  were  frequently  sent 
to  the  authorities  in  England  by  persons  familiar  with  the 
tobacco  trade,  and  were  gratefully  received  and  con- 
sidered.^'^*' Every  royal  governor,  along  with  his  ordinary 
instructions  from  the  Board  of  Trade,  received  on  his  entry 
into  office  a  long  and  elaborate  set  of  directions  for  the  ob- 
servance  of   the   Acts   of   Trade."^     Further   information 

^^5  The  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  presented  a  report  to  the 
House  of  Lords  in  169S  on  illegal  trade  in  the  proprietary  colonies. 
The  query  was  whether  Carolina,  Maryland,  Pennsylvania,  etc.,  were 
keeping  the  Acts  of  Trade.  In  the  answer  given,  that  "  we  are 
doubtful  whether  the  Said  plantacon  Lawes  are  so  well  Executed 
...  in  CaroHna,  Pennsylvania,  the  Jerseyes  and  Road  Islands  as  in 
the  other  Plantations,"  the  name  of  Maryland  is,  significantly  enough, 
omitted  (Treasury  Papers,  xxxvi,  3). 

The  records  are  full  of  complaints  that  Pennsylvania  was  a  hot- 
bed of  smuggling  (C.  O.  5:  1257,  27,  28,  29;  C.  O.  5 :  1260,  90  (vi)  ; 
C.  O.  S:  719,  4,  Bundle  5;  C.  O.  5:  719,  iB,  Bundle  3;  C.  O.  5:  7i4. 
I,  17,  17  (iii),  52,  52  (v),  52  (vi)).  Maryland  occasionally  sent 
tobacco  to  Pennsylvania  for  direct  shipment  elsewhere  than  to  Eng- 
land (C.  O.  5:  713,  115;  C.  O.  5 :  1314,  M.  62;  Archives,  vol.  _xxiii, 
p.  87).  In  1697  a  certain  Pennsylvanian,  however,  denied  that  this 
practice  was  ever  allowed.  "  And  as  to  running  Tobaccoe  to  Pen- 
silvania  at  the  head  of  the  Bay  from  Maryland  is  a  Gen"  mistake 
the  Inhabitants  of  Pensilvania  forbidding  it  by  a  Perticular  law  of 
their  making  And  to  my  knowledge  instead  of  that  there  was  the 
Last  year  about  100  hhds  Tobaccoe  Transported  over  Land  from 
Pensilvania  to  Maryland  Partly  by  a  Permit  of  Col'  Ninkolsons 
being  tobaccoe  to  be  transported  that  way  for  England"  (C.  O.  5: 
1257,  4).  On  the  whole  Maryland  must  have  had  little  share  in  the 
illegal  trade  of  the  northern  colony. 

i<56  Proposalls  Humbly  offered  to  the  Hon""'^  House  of  Com- 
mons, not  dated  (Harleian  MSS.  1238.  f.  i.  British  Museum).  Mr. 
Randolph's  account  of  the  way  illegal  trade  is  encouraged  in  Vir- 
ginia, Maryland,  and  Pennsylvania,  with  ways  of  prevention  (C.  O. 
323:  2,  6).  Colonel  Quary  to  the  Board  of  Trade.  Among  other 
things  he  considered  proposals  for  the  security  of  trade  primarily 
in  the  plantations  (C.  O.  323:  S,  19). 

167  Instructions  to  Governor  Nicholson  (Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p. 
311).  Instructions  to  Governor  Seymour  (C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  222). 
Instructions  to  Governor  Hart  (C.  O.  5:  727,  p.  398). 


563]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT    TRADE  121 

concerning  the  Acts  was  also  given  him  from  time  to  time.^"* 
The  Lords  of  the  Council,  the  House  of  Lords,  and  espe- 
cially the  Board  of  Trade  and  the  Commissioners  of  the 
Customs,  as  most  concerned  in  colonial  affairs,  corresponded 
often  with  all  the  colonial  governments  on  every  phase  of  the 
question  of  illegal  trade.  They  wanted  to  know  in  detail 
the  extent  of  the  smuggling  in  each  province,  and  they  urged 
the  governors  in  circular  letters  to  observe  the  Acts  of 
Trade  in  their  provinces,  to  force  their  customs  officials  to 
perform  their  duties,  to  support  them  while  so  doing,  and  to 
prevent  illegal  trade  with  Europe  by  way  of  Newfoundland.^'^" 
The  governors  of  Maryland  supported  the  royal  efforts 
to  crush  illegal  trade.  Governor  Nicholson  received  from 
the  lord  high  admiral  of  England  a  commission  as  vice- 
admiral  with  authority  to  erect  an  admiralty  court  in  Alary- 
land,^'^"  and  he  executed  his  office  by  naming  and  establishing 
during  his  administration  full  admiralty  courts  for  the  trial 
of   oft'enses  against   the  Acts   of   Trade.^'^     Although   the 

1^*  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  418 ;  C.  O.  5  :  726,  p.  284 ;  C.  O.  S :  72"],  p.  47. 

169  Queries  of  Board  of  Trade  about  the  methods  of  preventing 
illegal  trade  in  Maryland  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  499;  C.  O.  5:  726, 
p.  436).  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  to  the  governors  of  planta- 
tions, a  paper  enclosed  in  their  report  to  the  House  of  Lords  (Treas- 
ury Papers,  xxxvi,  3).  Lords  of  the  Council  to  Maryland,  enclos- 
ing late  act  of  Parliament  regulating  frauds  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p. 
418).  Address  of  House  of  Lords  to  the  king  about  the  state  of 
trade  in  the  kingdoms  with  reference  to  the  plantations  (C.  O.  323: 
2,  46).  Order  in  Council  approving  order  for  naval  officers  to 
give  security  and  directing  such  order  to  be  sent  to  the  governors 
of  plantations  (C.  O.  323:  2,  145).  Copy  of  instructions  to  Gover- 
nor Blakiston  (C.  O.  5:  725,  pp.  253-289).  Report  of  the  Commis- 
sioners of  the  Customs  to  the  Lords  of  the  Treasury  about  trade  in 
the  plantations  (Treasury  Papers,  Ivi,  82). 

i"o  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  91,  100. 

^"^  Ibid.,  pp.  115,  161.  Lionel  Copley's  commission  also  contained 
a  clause  authorizing  him  to  exercise  powers  of  vice-admiral  and  to 
erect  a  court  of  admiralty  in  Maryland  (ibid.,  vol.  viii,  p.  268).  The 
legality  of  this  authority  was  denied  by  Nicholson  on  the  ground 
that  the  commission  was  not  held  directly  from  the  lord  high  ad- 
miral (ibid.,  vol.  XX,  p.  iiS).  As  a  matter  of  fact  Copley  made  no 
attempt  to  establish  a  permanent  admiralty  court,  but  continued  the 
practice  of  appointing  four  judges  to  try  any  case  of  breach  of  the 
Acts  of  Trade,  under  a  commission  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  (ibid., 
vol.  XX,  pp.  42,  64).  Once  he  appointed  a  temporary  admiralty 
court  to  try  one  ship  (ibid.,  vol.  xx,  pp.  72,  75).     The  detailed  his- 


122  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [564 

governor  was  doubtful  for  a  time  whether  all  breaches  of 
the  Acts  could  be  legally  tried  in  a  court  of  admiralty,"-  the 
larger  number  of  cases  that  arose  during  the  period  of 
royal  government  from  this  time  were  certainly  so  tried. "^ 
Nicholson  was  highly  praised  by  the  royal  officials  in  the 
colonies  for  his  zeal."*  Governor  Blakiston  also  showed 
commendable  energy  in  apprehending  at  least  three  vessels 
through  admiralty  court  process.^'^  Seymour's  chief  activi- 
ties as  vice-admiral  were  concerned  with  the  condemnation 
of  French  prizes/""  but  according  to  his  testimony  illegal 
trade  in  Maryland  had  almost  entirely  ceased,  owing  to  the 
efforts  of  the  customs  officials.^'" 

These  governors  and  their  councils  also  exercised  their 
zeal  in  attempts  to  make  the  bond  and  security  system  really 
effectual.  All  masters  of  ships  had  to  give  oath  that  their 
certificates  or  bonds  taken  in  England  were  genuine  and  that 
their  cargoes  were  correctly  declared. ^^^  Collectors,  survey- 
ors, and  naval  officers  had  to  return  to  the  government  lists 
of  ships,  bonds,  certificates,  and  ladings  from  their  districts 

tory  of  the  establishment  of  an  admiralty  court  in  Maryland  belongs 
rather  to  the  history  of  the  administration  than  to  a  discussion  of 
the  amount  of  illegal  trade  in  the  colony. 

i"2  Nicholson  recommended  the  establishment  of  a  court  of  ex- 
chequer in  Maryland  because  he  was  not  sure  that  all  cases  of  illegal 
trading  could  be  tried  in  the  admiralty  courts  (C.  O.  5:  719,  18, 
Bundle  3 ;  C.  O.  5 :  714,  25,  B.  4;  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  195).  His 
difficulty  was,  however,  set  at  rest  by  the  attorney-general  in  Eng- 
land, who  said  that  all  such  cases  could  be  brought  before  the  admi- 
ralty courts  (Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  195,  196). 

1-3  Several  vessels  were  specifically  tried  in  the  admiralty  courts 
either  as  prizes  or  for  breach  of  the  Acts  of  Trade  (Archives,  vol. 
XX,  p.  113;  vol.  XXV,  pp.  16,  16s,  178;  C.  O.  S:  1309,  74  (iii)  ;  C.  O. 
5:  714,  69  (i),  C.  31;  C.  O.  5:  721,  I,  I  (i),  I  (ii),  I  (iii);  C.  O.  5 : 
716,  H.  14.  H.  15.).  A  few  vessels,  on  the  other  hand,  seem  to  have 
been  tried  by  a  special  court  or  by  a  regular  session  of  the  provincial 
court  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  134,  I5S,  243-244,  366,  508;  vol.  xxiii, 

p.  3;  C.  O.  323:  2,  5  ("))•  ^^  _      , 

"4C.  O.  323:  2,  114;  C.  O.  5:  1257,  27;  C.  O.  S:  1258,  16. 

"5C.  O.  S:  719,  2,  3,  6,  Bundle  7;  C.  O.  5:  7H,  69  (i),  C.  31; 
C.  O.  5:  71S,  2,  D.  16;  C.  O.  5:  72s,  P-  403- 

176  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  14,  H.  15. 

1'^  C.  O.  5  :  716,  H.  74.  The  Board  of  Trade  considered  Seymour  s 
attitude  toward  illegal  trade  commendable  (C.  O.  5:  727,  p.  112). 

I'^s  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  502 ;  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  4,  86. 


565]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  1 23 

in  order  that  accurate  accounts  might  be  kept.^'"  Collector 
Plater  of  Patuxent  was  even  ordered  to  send  to  the  Ameri- 
can plantations  to  which  tobacco  was  shipped  from  Mary- 
land for  their  records  of  imports,  in  order  to  balance  ac- 
counts at  both  ends.^^"  Although  the  people  were  poor  and 
it  was  a  difficult  task/^^  the  governors  professed  themselves 
careful,  according  to  royal  command, ^''^  to  receive  only  good 
security  for  navigation  bonds  entered  in  the  colony.^'^'^  In  1694 
the  attorney-general  of  Maryland  was  ordered  in  the  interests 
of  the  crown  to  put  in  suit,  after  twelve  months'  interval,  all 
navigation  bonds  for  which  no  proper  certificates  had  been 
returned.^**  Two  years  later  a  similar  order  was  issued,^^^ 
and  a  recjuest  for  an  extension  of  time  for  the  return  of 
certificates  was  refused/^^  The  conveyancing  of  his  prop- 
erty to  another  by  the  bondholder  to  avoid  the  payment 
of  the  bond  was  declared  illegal/^^  Both  Governor  Nich- 
olson and  Governor  Blakiston  realized,  however,  that  pay- 
ment was  often  almost  impossible,  and  recommended  that 
in  some  instances  executions  of  judgments  against  bond- 
holders be  remitted. ^^^  It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  whether 
or  not  this  recommendation  was  accepted. 

1^9  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  585;  vol.  xxiii,  p.  38;  C.  O.  5:  714,  17  (iv), 
A.  30. 

180  C.  O.  5:  714,  17  (iv),  A.  30.     See  also  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  38. 

isi  The  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  once  stated  that  it  was 
well  known  that  bonds  taken  in  the  plantations  were  from  persons 
of  insufficient  means  (Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  431). 

182  The  trade  instructions  of  the  governors  insist  on  this  point 
(Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  91,  315;  C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  247;  C.  O.  5 : 
-j^y,  p.  398). 

183  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  86;  C.  O.  5:  714,  ^2,  C.  4. 
18*  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  40,  65. 

183  Ibid.,  vol.  XX,  p.  477.  Two  years  later  Edward  Randolph  wrote 
to  the  Board  of  Trade  that  Nicholson  had  put  all  forfeited  naviga- 
tion bonds  in  suit  (C.  O.  Z22,:  2  (iii)). 

186  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  508. 

187  Ibid.,  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  4,  121. 

188  Ibid.,  p.  88;  C.  O.  5:  714,  62,  C.  14.  Governor  Nicholson  made 
his  recommendation  for  mercy  with  reservations.  "If  his  Maty  be 
graciously  pleased  to  grant  ye  humble  peticon  of  ye  Burgesses  (and 
what  they  suggest  therein,  I  must  needs  own  to  be  true)  yet  I  most 
humbly  propose  yt  some  of  ym  may  be  made  examples  especially 
some  of  those  who  have  been  illegal  Traders  within  these  2  or  3 
years"  (C.  O.  5:  714,  16).     In  1697  Collectors  Plater  and  Muschamp 


124  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [5^6 

Whether  or  not  execution  was  always  entered  on  judg- 
ments obtained,  this  energy  on  the  part  of  the  earHer  royal 
governors  did  definitely  result  in  the  prosecution  of  a  num- 
ber of  holders  of  navigation  bonds  for  which  certificates  had 
not  been  obtained.  Extant  records  dated  1697  show  that 
sixty- four  vessels  bonded  in  the  colony  between  1679  and 

1697  had  duly  returned  their  certificates. ^^^  One  hundred 
and  forty  were  reported  for  not  producing  the  proper  papers 
to  discharge  their  bonds,"**  and  elsewhere  one  hundred  and 
thirty-one  ships  were  said  to  be  impleaded  upon  suit  for  the 
king.^^^  One  hundred  and  twenty-five  vessels  of  these  two 
lists  are  duplicates,  but  the  other  names  dififer,  making  an 
unduplicated  list  of  one  hundred  and  forty-three  vessels 
which  had  not  discharged  their  bonds.  A  separate  account 
for  the  same  date  (1697)  of  twenty-eight  other  ships  already 
condemned  swells  the  number  of  bonds  prosecuted  before 

1698  to  one  hundred  and  seventy-one. "- 

There  are  also  available  two  accounts  of  cases  on  for- 
feited bonds  presented  before  the  provincial  courts  in  1697 
and  1698."^     Wherever  these  cases  could  be  identified  they 

both  said  that  even  if  executions  were  entered  into  for  forfeited 
bonds  the  revenue  of  the  king  would  be  but  little  increased,  as  the 
people  were  very  poor  (C.  O.  5:  741,  p.  367)- 

189  C.  O.  5:  714.  17  (v),  list  of  sixty  ships  on  which  certificates 
had  been  produced.  This  list  with  several  exceptions  may  also  be 
found  in  Treasury  Papers,  1,  27,  in  which  account  four  new  names 
are  added. 

190  C.  O.  5:  714,  17  (v). 

191  The  other  list  that  was  apparently  sent  home  to  the  Treasury 
at  the  same  time  as  the  first  one  is  on  record  in  Treasury  Papers,  1, 
27,  no.  I. 

192  C.  O.  5 :  714,  17  (v).  It  is  significant  that  all  these  lists  include 
bonds  entered  into  in  the  colony  throughout  a  period  of  eighteen 
years,  a  fact  which  must  be  taken  into  account  when  the  numbers 
forfeited  are  considered.  It  is  unfortunate  that  no  records  for  the 
later  years  of  royal  government  in  Maryland  are  available  on  this 
point.  General  conclusions  must  be  drawn  from  the  material  for 
the  first  decade,  and  Governor  Seymour's  statement  that  there  was 
little  or  no  illegal  trade  during  his  government  should  probably  be 
accepted  for  this  point  as  well  as  for  other  irregularities  in  trade. 

193  C.  O.  5:  714,  25  (iv).  B.  12,  Abstract  of  causes  contmued 
from  May  Court,  1697,  at  His  Majesty's  suit  on  navigation  bonds. 
This  list  is  not  complete,  as  it  is  simply  a  record  of  contmued  cases 
C.  O.  5:  714.  47  (x),  B.  44,  Docket  of  causes  tried  in  the  Provmcial 
Court,  April,  1698,  upon  navigation  and  other  bonds  passed  to  the 
king. 


567]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND    ILLICIT   TRADE  1 25 

were  found  to  be  almost  invariably  on  bonds  reported  as 
impleaded  in  the  earlier  accounts.  The  fact  that  out  of  the 
fifty-nine  cases  brought  before  the  court  in  1698  only  four 
judgments  for  the  king  were  obtained  would  serve  to  indi- 
cate that  in  the  majority  of  cases  the  certificates  were 
eventually  produced,  or  that  the  provincial  juries  were 
unduly  lenient.  Governor  Nicholson  was  inclined  to  the  latter 
opinion/'^*  but  as  far  as  the  cases  are  analyzed  there  seem 
to  have  been  perfectly  legitimate  reasons  for  the  continuance 
or  discharge  of  most  of  the  trials. ^''^  At  any  rate,  from  the 
one  cause  or  the  other,  judgments  were  comparatively  rare. 
Only  twenty-eight  vessels  were  condemned  in  1697,  and  on 
some  of  these  the  bonds  were  taken  as  early  as  thirteen  years 
before.  In  the  April  court  of  1698  four  more  condemna- 
tions were  made  out  of  fifty-nine  prosecuted  bonds. ^^'^  Al- 
though judgments  were  rare  and  the  revenue  from  those 
executed  was  evidently  very  small,  the  zeal  of  the  royal  gov- 
ernors was  undoubtedly  manifested  inconstant  efforts  to  hold 
the  customs  officers  and  the  ship  masters  up  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  Acts  of  Trade  in  the  taking  of  oaths  and 
securities. 

In  another  way,  moreover,  the  support  which  the  colonial 
governors  gave  to  the  English  authorities  was  no  less  notice- 
able. The  Commissioners  of  the  Customs,  in  response  to  a 
suggestion  of  the  Virginia  merchants  in  London,  conceived 

19*  C.  O.  s:  713,  114. 

135  The  following  is  a  good  example  of  what  happened  in  the 
April  Court,  1698.  A  bond  of  £2000  against  Edloe  of  Maryland  was 
discharged  by  the  oath  of  Hammond,  who  deposed  that  he  sent 
tobacco  to  England  in  the  ship  for  whose  captain  Edloe  had  become 
security,  and  that  he  had  had  account  of  the  sale  thereof  in  London 
(C.  O.  5:  714,  47  (x),  B.  44). 

19C  Even  these  judgments  were  apparently  not  executed.  The 
securities  brought  writs  of  error  and  reversed  the  judgment  because 
the  bonds  were  destroyed  in  the  interval  between  the  first  judgment 
and  the  attempted  execution.  This  writ  of  error  was  sustained  by 
Edward  Northey,  but  he  thought  that  judgment  might  be  obtained 
for  His  Majesty  again  in  equity  in  chancery  court.  It  was  decided 
that  the  case  should  be  so  pleaded,  but  the  final  decision  is  not  given 
(Archives,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  392;  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol. 
ii,  p.  625;  Add.  MSS.  8832,  ff.  261-262,  British  Museum;  Add.  MSS. 
361  ID,  S.  75-78,  British  Museum). 


126  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [568 

the  idea  of  appointing  a  small  vessel  under  a  competent  com- 
mander to  cruise  in  Chesapeake  Bay  for  the  detection  of 
illegal  traders. ^^^  This  plan,  after  being  approved  by  the 
proper  authorities,"^  resulted  in  an  Order  in  Council  that 
Governor  Nicholson,  going  to  Maryland  in  1694,  be  in- 
structed to  hire  a  boat  of  forty  tons  burden  to  cruise  off  the 
coasts  to  examine  ships  trading  in  those  parts/^''  A  small 
vessel  under  the  command  of  Thomas  Meech  was  em- 
ployed,-^" but  unfortunately  for  the  success  of  the  plan 
Meech  was  drowned  within  a  year,-"^  and  another  vessel 
despatched  by  the  Lords  of  the  Admiralty  to  Maryland  was 
wrecked  off  the  Carolina  coast.---  Still  a  third  royal  boat 
under  the  command  of  Captain  Peter  Coode  was  lost  at 
sea,^°^  but  in  spite  of  these  misfortunes  the  governors  con- 
tinued to  urge  the  advantages  of  the  system.^"'*  It  was  so 
easy,  said  Governor  Blakiston,  for  false  traders  to  unload 
secretly  in  the  little  creeks  and  rivers  of  the  province  that  a 
small  boat  was  almost  indispensable  to  follow  them  into  out- 
of-the-way  places.-*^^  Blakiston  even  went  so  far  as  to  hire 
at  his  own  expense  vessels  which  were  apparently  used  in 
this  service.^"^     It  is  clear  that  the  royal  governors  could 


197  Treasury  Papers,  xxvii,  19. 

198  The  report  of  the  Commissioners  of  the  Customs  went  to  the 
Lords  of  the  Treasury,  was  sent  by  them  to  the  Lords  of  Trade, 
and  finally  came  before  the  Privy  Council  (Treasury  Papers,  xxvii, 
19;  C.  O.  5:  1308,  46;  C.  O.  323:  2,  6  (xii)). 

199  C.  O.  22^:  2,  6  (xii).  The  order  of  the  Council  was  sent  to 
Nicholson  by  the  Lords  of  Trade  and  was  accompanied  by  an  elabo- 
rate set  of  instructions  for  the  captain  employed  by  the  governor 
(C.  O.  5:  1308,  59,  60;  Treasury  Papers,  xxx,  16,  45;  C.  O.  5 :  724, 
p.  180;  Archives,  vol.  xx,  pp.  240,  262,  263;  vol.  xxiii,  p.  55i)- 

200  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  240;  C.  O.  5 :  724.  P-  I99- 

201  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  367;  C.  O.  5 :  74i,  P-  76;  C  O.  5:  7I4, 

I,  A.  I ;  C.  O.  5 :  725.  P-  i- 

202  This  vessel  was  sent  from  England  by  the  Lords  of  the  Ad- 
miralty, contrary  to  Randolph's  advice  that  it  be  procured  in  the 
colony  (Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  Col.  vol.  ii,  p.  310;  Archives,  vol. 
xxiii.  p.  208;  C.  O.  5:  714.  30,  31,  37)- 

203(3.  O.  5:  726,  p.  139;  Archives,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  19. 

204  C.  O.  5:  714,  I,  A.  I,  25;  C.  O.  5:  715,  64,  E.  47;  C.  O.  S:  7i6, 
H.  74;  C.  O.  5 :  719,  18,  Bundle  3 ;  C.  O.  5 :  7i9.  2,  Bundle  7.  Robert 
Quary  also  approved  this  plan  (C.  O.  323:  5.  I9  (ii))- 

20''' C.  O.  5:  719,  2,  Bundle  7. 

206  Treasury  Papers,  cii,  67. 


569]  TRADE   ROUTES    AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  12/ 

not  have  been  more  zealous  or  more  faithful.  They  stood 
side  by  side  with  the  English  customs  authorities  in  their 
efforts  to  enforce  the  Acts  of  Trade  and  to  prevent  smuggling. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  find  out  whether  the  governors 
were  supported  by  the  provincial  legislature,  by  the  courts, 
and  by  the  inhabitants.  Unfortunately,  however,  little  evi- 
dence is  available  on  these  points,  and  that  comes  from 
prejudiced  sources,  that  is,  from  the  governors  themselves 
or  the  English  customs  authorities.  Edward  Randolph  in- 
sisted that  even  Governor  Copley  himself  in  1692  aided  and 
abetted  the  acquittal  of  three  ships  which  Randolph  had 
seized, -°'  that  local  collectors  were  not  always  honest  in  their 
efforts  to  suppress  illegal  trade,-"^  and  that  local  courts  and 
juries  were  prejudiced  against  His  Majesty's  cases.-"**  In 
Governor  Nicholson's  time  the  Assembly  did  petition  for  a 
relaxation  of  the  severe  enforcement  of  the  Navigation  Acts 
in  their  province,  thus  showing  no  great  love  for  the  re- 
strictions imposed. -^°  The  governor  complained,  too,  that 
the  Assembly  would  not  ask  for  an  English  cruiser  lest  its 
presence  in  Maryland  waters  should  prevent  smuggling,'^^ 
and  he  accused  the  whole  people  of  longing  in  years  of 
peace  for  Lord  Baltimore's  loose  government  and  their  "Dar- 
ling, illegal  trade. "^^^  These  were,  however,  practically  the 
only  accusations  made,  even  from  prejudiced  sources,  and  it 
is  impossible  to  draw  from  them  the  conclusion  that  the 
legislature,  the  courts,  or  the  colonists  in  general  were  in- 
clined to  connive  at  breaches  of  the  Acts  of  Trade. 

Evasions  of  colonial  acts  imposing  customs  duties  are 
equally  infrequent.  The  chief  duties  levied  in  the  province 
were  those  upon  exported  tobacco.     These  must  have  been 

207  Archives,  vol.  viii,  p.  335 ;  C.  O.  323 :  2,  7. 

208  C.  O.  323  ■■  2,  6,  7. 

209  C.  O.  323:  2,  5  (ii).  There  is  also  on  record  a  letter  written 
to  the  attornei^-general  in  England  by  the  Board  of  Trade  to  find 
out  what  might  be  done  in  Maryland  to  attaint  juries  which  would 
not  condemn  ships  for  breaches  of  the  Navigation  Acts.  Nicholson 
had  asked  the  question  of  the  Board  of  Trade  (C.  O.  5:  725,  p.  19). 

210  Treasury  Papers,  1,  27. 

211  C.  O.  5 :  714,  25,  B.  4. 

212  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  491. 


128  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [S/O 

easily  collected,  because  the  strict  surveillance  exercised  by 
the  English  customs  officials  in  the  enforcement  of  the  Navi- 
gation Acts  made  it  difficult  for  any  tobacco  to  be  sent  out 
of  the  colony  without  official  inspection.  Besides  the  duties 
on  the  chief  staple,  levies  were  also  made  on  furs,  beef,  pork, 
or  European  goods  exported  from  the  province,  and  on  im- 
ported wines,  liquors,  and  negroes,  and  there  is  strong  reason 
to  believe  that  their  payment  was  usually  enforced.  In  the 
collection  of  these  duties  the  chief  area  of  trouble  was  the 
Pennsylvania  border,  over  which  dutiable  articles  might 
easily  be  smuggled.-^^  To  avoid  this  possibility  a  riding 
surveyor  was  appointed  in  Cecil  County  at  the  head  of  the 
bay  to  prevent  illicit  trade  with  Pennsylvania.-^*  Just  after 
the  appointment  of  this  officer  in  1697  Governor  Nicholson 
asserted  that  there  were  good  roads  between  the  two  prov- 
inces on  which  boats  for  illicit  trade  might  easily  be  carted 
to  and  fro,-^^  but  in  spite  of  his  assertion  the  amount  of 
smuggling  was  probably  small.  Enough  seizures  were  made 
to  show  that  the  officers  were  fairly  vigilant,  but  the  insig- 
nificant size  and  value  of  their  confiscations  do  not  argue  a 
flourishing  illicit  trade  with  the  northern  colony.-^'* 

213  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  279;  vol.  xxiii,  p.  87. 

21*  Ibid.,  vol.  xx,  pp.  284,  388.  For  a  time  there  were  two  riding 
surveyors,  one  in  Cecil  County  and  one  in  Williamstadt  on  the 
Eastern  Shore  (ibid.,  vol.  xx.  pp.  284,  388,  517)-  The  office  in 
Cecil  County  was  continued  at  least  until  1703  (ibid.,  vol.  xxv,  p.  161). 

215  Ibid.,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  87. 

-^^  A  proclamation  concerning  the  trade  with  Pennsylvania  in  169S 
would  make  it  seem  as  if  there  were  considerable  cause  for  com- 
plaint. "And  Forasmuch  as  (by  severall  Complaints  &  other  advice 
received)  it  is  made  apparent  that  the  Trade  of  this  Province  is 
much  impared  &  Damnifyed  by  Sloops  Shallops  &  Boates  off  & 
belonging  to  the  province  of  Pensilvania  Town  of  New  castle  & 
Territoryes  thereunto  belonging  (they  being  distinct  Governm*^ 
from  this)  which  keep  runing  and  Trading  up  and  down  w"'in  the 
severall  Rivers  and  Creekes  of  this  his  Ma"  Province  of  Maryland, 
transporting  their  loading  over  land  &  taking  in  the  same  at_  the 
heads  of  Severall  Rivers  w*''in  this  Province  especially  Bohemia  & 
Elke  Rivers,  and  not  only  so;  but  are  frequently  known  to  trans- 
port in  Carts  at  the  said  places  indifferent  large  Sloopes,  Shallops, 
&  Boates  w^^out  making  any  report  or  Entrey  thereof  .  .  .  and 
Forasmuch  as  it  hath  likewise  been  represented  vmto  me  in  Councill, 
how  that  his  Ma*^  Duty  for  Importacon  of  Liquo""*  from  those  parts 
have  been  much  defrauded  by  concealing  &  hiding  severall  Runlets 


57  I  ]        TRADE  ROUTES  AND  ILLICIT  TRADE  I  29 

The  records  indicate  only  a  few  seizures  in  other  parts 
of  Maryland  for  breaches  of  the  colonial  acts  and  these 
were  on  a  very  small  scale.-^"  It  is  unlikely  in  view  of  the 
general  activity  of  the  royal  government  in  cases  of  illegal 
trade  that  much  smuggling  even  in  violation  of  colonial  acts 
went  on  undiscovered,  and  there  are  certainly  no  references 
to  this  kind  of  trade  as  frequent  in  the  colony  after  1697,  the 
date  of  Governor  Nicholson's  statement.  Legitimate  trade 
in  dutiable  commodities  other  than  tobacco  was  not  large, 
and  smuggling  could  not  have  increased  its  volume  to  any 
appreciable  extent. 

It  is  still  possible  that  Maryland  colonists  might  have 
traded  with  the  pirates  who  haunted  colonial  waters  during 
these  years.  Their  presence  would  have  opened  routes  for 
a  dangerous  but  profitable  trade.  The  English  government 
undoubtedly  dreaded  pirates  in  the  waters  of  the  province. 
They  were  a  menace  because  they  might  capture  vessels 
sailing  to  or  from  England,  and  because  they  could  easily 
make  alliances  with  the  inhabitants  for  carrying  on  illegal 
trade.  The  authorities  at  home,  therefore,  continually 
warned  the  Maryland  governors  to  be  vigilant  for  the  pro- 
tection of  the  province  and  for  the  preservation  of  its  trade 

full  of  Brandy  Rum  &  other  Spirits,  And  wine  w'^in  Caske  pre- 
tended to  be  filled  with  Bisket  and  fifloore "  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p. 
279).  There  are  a  few  specific  instances  of  this  trade  (ibid.,  vol. 
xxiii,  pp.  151,  166,  and  probably  399;  vol.  xxv,  p.  161),  but  the  small 
number  and  value  of  the  seizures  show  that  it  was  not  so  dangerous 
as  the  proclamation  makes  it  appear. 

21"  Shallop  seized  for  exporting  skins  (Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  284). 
Sloop  which  carried  sixteen  barrels  of  pork  from  Somerset  (ibid., 
vol.  XX,  p.  486).  Shallop  seized  by  deputy  collector  of  Williamstadt 
(ibid.,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  loi).  Twenty-two  negroes  brought  into  the 
province  without  entry  (ibid.,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  8).  Thirty-five  negroes 
imported  without  paying  duty  (ibid.,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  240,  241).  Also 
a  schedule  of  goods  from  one  boat  seized  by  the  naval  officers  for 
Cecil  County.  This  schedule  indicates  how  petty  the  trade  was. 
It  includes  i  keg  of  rum.  9  gallons,  Yi  barrel  of  beer,  Yi  barrel  of 
beer  half  out,  2  runlets  of  beer  of  2  gallons  each,  V/z  pints  of  spirits, 
ij^  pints  of  sugared  rum,  i  pint  bottle  of  rum  and  syrup  mixed,  13 
pairs  of  gloves,  i  fishing  line,  i  knife  and  fork,  3  small  pieces  of 
lead,  I  barrel  of  biscuit,  i  pot  and  pothooks,  i  fowling  piece  and 
ammunition,  i  small  glass  bottle,  2  chests  and  a  small  box,  i  large 
cake  of  gingerbread,  10  dollars,  5  casks  containing  upwards  of  eight 
hundredweight  of  sugar  (ibid.,  vok  xxiii,  p.  71). 

9 


130  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [S7^ 

against  the  pirates,-^^  and  they  kept  the  colony  informed  of 
any  especially  notorious  pirate  captains  who  might  be  ap- 
proaching the  coast.-i''  The  law  for  the  trial  of  pirates  in 
the  plantations  naturally  included  Maryland,"''  and  her  gov- 
ernor received  a  definite  commission  to  try  all  cases  of  piracy 
found  in  Maryland  or  Pennsylvania."^  The  royal  gov- 
ernors themselves  were  no  less  concerned  at  the  possible 
presence  of  pirates  in  their  waters.  They  imparted  their 
fears  to  the  English  government,"^  they  rehearsed  the  pre- 
cautions which  they  had  taken  or  wanted  to  take  to  capture 
the  pirates,"^  and  they  frequently  issued  proclamations 
against  well-known  captains .  -"* 

As  a  matter  of  fact  their  precautions  were  hardly  worth 
while.  Only  a  few  alleged  pirates  ever  came  to  Maryland  at 
all,  and  some  of  these  were  probably  innocent.  There  were, 
however,  many  rumors  of  pirates  in  Pennsylvania  and  of  an 
alliance  between  them  and  the  Pennsylvanians  which  caused 
considerable  anxiety  to  the  governors  of  Maryland  through- 
out the  whole  period  of  royal  control.--^     Finally,  Nichol- 


218  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  25;  C  O.  S:  725,  PP-  ^77,  382,  4/8;  Ar- 
chives, vol.  XXV,  p.  78. 

219  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  496 ;  vol.  xxv,  p.  73. 

220  Draught  of  the  bill  for  the  trial  of  pirates  (C.  O.  323:  2,  105, 
113,  a  duplicate  copy).     See  also  C.  O.  5 :  725,  P-  49°,  and  li  W'llham 

in,  c.  7. 

221  Order  in  Council  for  commissions  to  be  issued  to  the  colonial 
governors  for  the  trial  of  pirates  (C.  O.  323:  3,  68).  Circular  letter 
(C.  O.  5:  726,  p.  41).  Blakiston's  commission  (C.  O.  5:  726,  pp. 
22,  27,  37). 

222  C.  O.  5:  719,  18,  Bundle  3;  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  486;  vol.  xxiii, 

p.  85;  C.  O.  5:  714,  40  (i). 

223  It  was  partly  for  this  reason  that  the  governors  so  anxiously 
requested  a  small  frigate  in  Maryland  waters  (C.  O.  5:  "IQ,  18, 
Bundle  3  ;  Archives,  vol.  xxiii.  p.  85).  In  one  case  a  Captain  Darnell 
was  commissioned  to  capture  privateers  in  the  Delaware  (Archives, 
vol.  XX,  p.  532).  Maryland  vessels  were  ordered  even  in  time  of 
peace  to  sail  together  to  avoid  pirates  (C.  O.  5:  74i,  PP-  503,  504)- 
The  governors  joined  in  recommending  a  reward  to  those  persons 
discovering  pirates  (C.  O.  5:  1260,  76). 

224  C.  O.  5:  714,  54  (ii),  C.  21;  Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  132;  vol. 
xxv,  pp.  97,  100. 

225  Archives,  vol.  xx,  p.  566;  vol.  xxiii,  pp.  84.  159-163;  vol.  xxv, 
pp.  116,  554-570,  577-580;  C.  O.  5:  714,  25,  17  (iii),  B.  4,  B.  8;  C.  O. 
5:  715,  47,  E.  21,  Bundle  1701 ;  C  O.  5 :  74i.  P-  428.  In  view  of  the 
presence  of  pirates  in  Pennsylvania  the  officers  of  Cecil  County 
were  enjoined  by  Governor  Nicholson  to  be  especially  careful  to 
watch  for  them  (Archives,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  IS3)- 


573]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  I31 

son,  as  the  representative  of  English  authority  nearest  at 
hand,  actually  sent  an  armed  expedition  into  Pennsylvania 
to  bring  out  a  man  named  Day  who  was  suspected  of  piracy. 
But  Pennsylvania  was  justly  furious  at  this  invasion  of  her 
territory,  and  Governor  Markham  proved  that  Day  had  re- 
ceived a  commission  from  him  as  a  privateer  against  the 
French.^-"  Robert  Quary,  who  was  a  notorious  exaggera- 
tor,  warned  Governor  Blakiston  during  his  administration 
that  a  sloop  with  ten  pirates,  escaped  from  New  York,  was 
about  to  enter  Maryland  waters.--"  When  the  boat  was 
captured,  however,  the  number  against  whom  anything 
could  be  proved  dwindled  to  one  man.  He  was  tried  and 
sent  to  England,  and  the  sloop  in  which  he  had  come  to  the 
colony  was  condemned.--^  A  cabin  boy  of  Captain  Kidd's 
was  supposed  to  have  taken  passage  for  England  in  Mary- 
land, but  he  had  sailed  before  Blakiston  could  lay  hands  on 
him.-^*  Captain  Munday,  arriving  in  the  province  from 
trading  off  the  Guinea  coast  with  a  tale  of  the  piratical 
depredations  from  which  he  had  suffered,  was  himself  sus- 
pected of  collusion  with  the  pirates  and  was  laid  under  a 
heavy  bond. -^^  Real  pirates  must  have  frequented  the  mouth 
of  the  bay,  for  a  number  of  ships  trading  to  Maryland  were 
captured  by  pirates  and  the  London  merchants  even  peti- 
tioned for  a  convoy  to  protect  the  fleet  from  their  depre- 
dations,-^^ but  the  governors  themselves  acknowledged  that 
the  enclosed  character  of  the  seacoast  made  it  inconvenient 

--*'  For  a  complete  history  of  the  case  of  the  invasion  of  Penn- 
sylvania to  capture  Day  see  C.  O.  5:  1257,  6  (ii)-6  (ix).  See  also 
C.  O.  5:  714,  17  (iii). 

227  C.  O.  5:  719,  5,  Bundle  7;  C.  O.  5:  1258,  31- 

228  C.  O.  5:  719,  5,  6,  6  (i),  6  (ii),  8,  Bundle  7;  C.  O.  5 :  7U,  70, 
70  (i)-70  (vii)  ;  C.  O.  5:  715,  i,  D.  10,  Bundle  1700;  C.  O.  5 :  725, 
p.  402;  Treasury  Papers,  cii,  67. 

229  C.  O.  5 :  719,  7,  Bundle  7. 

230  C.  O.  5:  715,  Bundle  1700.  6,  8,  8  (ii)-8  (viii).  9,  10,  13.  14.  I/, 
18,  19.  It  appears  that  Munday's  connection  with  the  group  of 
London  merchants  extricated  him  from  having  to  answer  this  accu- 
sation.    See  page  96. 

231  C.  O.  5:  715,  4,  Bundle  1700;  C.  O.  5:  716,  H.  41,  H.  74;  C.  O. 
323 :  3,  28,  35. 


132  MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715  [574 

for  pirates  to  come  actually  into  the  province.-^-  On  the 
whole,  the  protected  position  of  Maryland  plus  the  vigilance 
of  her  governors  made  it  impossible  for  tlie  colony  to  be- 
come a  pirate  refuge,  or  for  the  inhabitants  to  carry  on  this 
form  of  illegal  trade. 

A  review  of  the  facts  contained  in  this  chapter  makes 
apparent  the  following  points :  The  great  trade  route  of 
Maryland  was  that  to  England,  employing  at  least  seventy 
ships  annually,  the  larger  number  from  the  English  metropo- 
lis. Usually  these  vessels  sailed,  probably  once  a  year  after 
1706,  in  regular  fleets  under  the  protection  of  a  convoy,  and 
in  Maryland  they  separated  to  obtain  their  return  cargo 
where  and  how  they  could.  When  the  tobacco  arrived  in 
England,  it  came  in  one  way  or  another  into  the  hands  of 
small  groups  of  merchants.  Those  in  London  were  so  im- 
portant that  much  of  the  conduct  of  the  tobacco  trade  was 
under  their  control ;  and  they  certainly  attempted,  with  what 
direct  success  it  is  impossible  to  say,  to  influence  the  gov- 
ernment policy  toward  that  trade.  The  measures  under- 
taken by  the  government  were  often  singularly  in  accord 
with  appeals  from  those  merchants.  The  tobacco  was  sold 
by  the  planter  to  the  merchants,  either  in  England,  in  which 
case  the  planter  in  Maryland  could  draw  bills  of  exchange 
on  the  merchant  for  his  shipment,  or  in  Maryland,  where  the 
factors  of  the  merchants  bought  the  staple  in  exchange  for 
imported  European  commodities.  Finally,  moreover,  this 
route  to  and  from  England  was  occasionally  lengthened  by 
a  voyage  to  the  Guinea  coast  for  negroes,  such  trips  being 
made  by  private  traders  not  under  the  control  of  the  Royal 
African  Company.  Trade  routes  to  foreign  countries  were 
insignificant  in  comparison  with  the  route  to  England,  but 
those  to  the  other  colonies  were  of  some  importance,  though 
the  vessels  concerned  and  the  bulk  of  traffic  were  small.  The 
chief  line  of  trade  was  to  Barbadoes.  The  boats  used  in 
coastwise  and  West  Indian  commerce  were  owned  for  the 

232  C.  O.  5:  715,  I,  D.  10;  C.  O.  5:  717,  I.  63;  C.  O.  S:  7i9,  9, 
Bundle  7. 


575]  TRADE   ROUTES   AND   ILLICIT   TRADE  1 33 

most  part  in  New  England  or  in  Maryland ;  as  many  as  one 
hundred  and  fifty-two  vessels  were  actually  built  or  build- 
ing in  the  colony  at  the  end  of  the  century. -'*•''  The  con- 
clusion has  been  reached  that  although  there  was  undoubt- 
edly a  certain  amount  of  illegal  trading,  the  precise  extent  of 
which  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain,  still  on  the  whole  the  Eng- 
lish authorities  were  so  zealous  that  breaches  of  the  Navi- 
gation Acts,  and  apparently  also  of  the  several  colonial 
acts,  were  comparatively  rare.  Absolutely  no  connection 
between  the  people  of  Maryland  and  any  of  the  notorious 
pirates  of  the  seventeenth  century  can  be  traced,  and  cer- 
tainly, too,  no  pirates  frequented  the  colony.  Neither  ille- 
gal trade  nor  piracy  had  any  appreciable  effect  on  the  de- 
velopment or  the  direction  of  Maryland  trade  routes. 

233  Not  all  these  vessels  were  concerned  in  the  intercolonial  trade, 
a  few  being  large  enough  to  form  part  of  the  fleet  engaged  in  the 
trade  to  England. 


134 


MARYLAND   TRADE^  1689-I715 


[576 


APPENDIX  I 


TIMBER  EXPORTED  FROM  VIRGINIA  AND  MARYLAND 

1697-1717 


Period 

Masts 

Oars 

Pipe  staves  and  hhd. 

Michaelmas 

1696- 

Lady  Day 

1697 

II  c.  I  q. 

Lady  Day 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1697 

I  small 

986  c.  I  q. 

Michaelmas 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1698 

I  q.  14  no. 

352  c.  I  q.   2  no. 

Michaelmas 

1698- 

Christmas 

1698 

191  c. 

Christmas 

1698- 

10  middle 

708  c.  I  q.  16  no. 

Christmas 

1699 

5  small 

1700 

2  great 

3  middle 

2  c.  I  q.    6  no. 

674  c.  I  q.  20  no. 

170 1 

744  c.  0  q.  10  no. 

1702 

1898  c.  3  q.  19  no. 

1703 

1040  c.  2  q.  14  no. 

1704 

12 

3288  c.  2  q.  14  no. 

1706 

2  small 

1479  c.  2  q.  10  no. 

1707 

1976  c. 

1708 

171OC.  oq.  15  no. 

1709 

40 

2472  c.  3  q.  IT  no. 

1710 

1489  c.  oq.  17  no. 

1711 

12  small 

1559  c.  3  q-    2  no. 

1713 

0  c.  2  q.  20  no. 

1622  c.  I  q.  20  no. 

1714 

2454  c.  3  q-  14  no. 

171S 

8  large 

15  middle 

4  small 

12 

3610  c.  oq.  12  no. 

1716 

3  large 

10  middle 

I  small 

40.  I  q. 

4706  c.  3  q.    6  no. 

1717 

86  large 
12  middle 
17  small 

5723  c.  2  q.    6  no. 

577] 


APPENDIX 


135 


APPENDIX  I   (cont.) 


Period 

Barrel  staves 

Hhd.  headings 

Oak  knees 

Michaelmas 

1696- 

Lady  Day 

1697 

Lady  Day 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1697 

Sc 

48  ps. 

Michaelmas 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1698 

5c. 

94 

Michaelmas 

1698- 

Christmas 

1698 

Christmas 

169&- 

loc.oq.  20no. 

Christmas 

1699 

1700 

15  c. 

1701 

317  c.  I  q.  20  no. 

1702 

120  c.  0  q.  24  no. 

1703 

29  c.  3  q.  24  no. 

IOC.  2q. 

Z^ 

1704 

127  c.  oq.  2ono. 

1706 

57  c. 

SC. 

1707 

155  c.  2q.  ID  no. 

1708 

149  c.  2  q.  10  no. 

8  c. 

1709 

269  c.  2  q.  20  no. 

32  c. 

Firkin 

staves 

15  c. 

1710 

95  c. 

22  c.  (bbl. 

heading) 

1711 

227  c.  0  q.    5  no. 

IOC. 

1713 

401  c.  3  q.  IS  no. 

I  c. 

1714 

712  c.  I  q. 

2  0. 

1715 

1115  c.  iq. 

7  c.  2  q. 

1716 

2748  c.  3  q.  14  no. 

24  c. 

1717 

2615  c.  3  q.  26  no. 

136 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[578 


APPENDIX  I   (cont.) 


Walnut  plank 

Other  plank  or  boards, 

Period 

or  boards 

oak,  cedar,  etc. 

Deals 

Michaelmas 

1696- 

Lady  Day 

1697 

Lady  Day 

1697- 

Value  of 

Michaelmas 

1697 

£33-  0.  0. 

Michaelmas 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1698 

215  ps. 

Michaelmas 

1698- 

Christmas 

1698 

41 

Christmas 

1698- 

Value  of 

993  ps.  and  plank 

Christmas 

1699 

£31-  7-  6. 

to  the  value  of 
£12.  5.  0. 

1700 

261  ps.  and  plank 

to  the  value  of 

i27.  5-  0. 

1701 

£  5.  0.  0. 

26  ps. 

1702 

£31.  0.  0. 

1703 

109  ps. 

2  loads 

8 

1704 

10  ps.  and 

at  value 

13  ps. 

oc.  I  q.  4  no. 

£  7.  10.  0. 

1706 

£  I.    0.  0. 

9ps. 

19 

1707 

48ps.and  120  ft. 

17  ps. 

1708 

£  4.    6.  0. 

24  ps. 

1709 

£69.  19.  0. 

1710 

102  ft. 

103  ps. 

1711 

24  small  ps. 

3  boards  and 
1590  ft. 

1713 

21  ps. 

£64.  10.  2. 

1714 

£11.    6.  8. 

1715 

25 

1716 
1717 

230  47/50  loads 
160  1 1/50  loads 

579] 


APPENDIX 


137 


Period 

Michaelmas   1696- 

Lady  Day      1697 

Lady  Day      1697- 

Michaelmas   1697 

Michaelmas   1697- 

Michaelmas   1698 

Michaelmas   1698- 

Christmas      1698 

Christmas      1698- 

Christmas      1699 

1700 

1701 

1702 

1703 

1704 

1706 

1707 

1708 

1709 

1710 

1711 

1713 
1714 

1715 
1716 


APPENDIX  I  (cont.) 

Spars 


Timber  and  wood  of  several  sorts 


o  c.  2  q.  17  no. 


1717 


0  c.  I  q.    0  no. 


30  loads 

4  loads  21  ft. 
2  loads 


lie.  wood 


4  loads  16  ft. 


Value  of  £14.  17.  4. 

S3  loads  and  wood  to  the 

value  of  £548.  4.  2. 

Value  of 

£56.  o.  0. 

32  23/50  loads  and  wood  to 

the  value  of  £248.  18.  i. 


Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  vols, 
i-xvii.  Inspector  General's  Accounts,  vol.  i ;  C.  O.  390:  8.  The  Cus- 
tom House  Accounts  are  followed  through  1714. 


138 


MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715 


[580 


APPENDIX  I   (cont.) 

PITCH  AND  TAR  AND  TURPENTINE  EXPORTED  FROM 

MARYLAND  AND  VIRGINIA,  1697-1715 


Period 


Michaelmas 

1696- 

Lady  Day 

1697 

Lady  Day 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1697 

Michaelmas 

1697- 

Michaelmas 

1698 

Michaelmas 

1698- 

Christmas 

1898 

1699 

1700 

1701 

1702 

1703 

1704 

1705 

1706 

1707 

1708 

1709 

1710 

1711 

1712 

1713 

1714 

1715 

Pitch  and  Tar 


None 


4  last*  6  barrels 

3  last    I  barrel 

None. 
I  last    8  barrels 

5  last  10  barrels 

None 

4  last  3  barrels 
2  barrels 
5  barrels 

4  barrels 

5  barrels 
8  barrels 
8  barrels 
7  barrels 

2  barrels 

3  barrels 

6  barrels 
2  barrels 

7  barrels 


2  last 
31  last 

9  last 
49  last 
31  last 

8  last 
IS  last 

3  last 
61  last 
54  last 
44  last 
14  last 


14  last    7  Darreis 
189  last  10  barrels 


rurpentine 


9c. 


Custom  House  Accounts,  Ledger  of  Imports  and  Exports,  vols, 
i-xvii;  Inspector  General's  Account,  vol.  i;  C.  O.  390:  6. 

*  Twelve  barrels  were  counted  to  the  last. 


APPENDIX  II 


CHRISTMAS    1698-CHRISTMAS    1699.     ENGLISH    MANU- 
FACTURED GOODS  EXPORTED  TO  VIRGINIA 
AND  MARYLAND 


Article 

Amount 

Value 
L.  s.  d. 

Allom 

7  cwt.  0  q.  14  lbs. 

Apparel 

19160  suits 

Apples 

300  bushels 

Apothecary  ware 

72  cwt.  3  q-  0  lbs. 

Aqua  vitae 

19  T.  2  hhd.  36  gal. 

Bacon 

13  flitches 

Baggs  money 

II7J4  doz. 

Beds  sea 

5 

Bellows 

1054  doz. 

Beef 

I  runlet 

Breeches 

4  pr. 

Bricks 

26000 

Beans 

I  bu. 

Beer 

'JZY^  T.  I  hhd.  I  bbl. 

Books  printed 

no  cwt.  3  q.  13  lbs. 

Bodies 

5630 

Brass  wrought 

310  cwt.  3  q.  23  lbs. 

Bridles 

534  5/12  doz. 

Butter 

164  firkins 

Buttons  hair 

138  groce 

Candles 

380  doz.  lbs. 

Capps  plain  monmouth 

65^  doz. 

Cards  new  wool 

52  2/3  doz. 

"      old 

51  doz. 

"      playing 

3  cwt.  3  q.  21  lbs. 

Chariots 

2 

Cheese 

441  cwt.  3  q.  ID  lbs. 

Copper  wrought 

26  cwt.  I  q.  2  lbs. 

Cordage 

306  cwt.  2  q.  0  lbs. 

Coals 

20  chaldron 

Collers  p.  horses 

82  2/3  doz. 

Cyder 

7  T.  23^  hhds. 

Dimity 

617  yds. 

Earthware 

75676  ps. 

Flax 

2  cwt.  3  q.  0  lbs. 

Fustian 

3440  ps. 

Guirts  for  saddles 

20  doz. 

Glass  bottles,  pint 

308 

"            "        quart 

25800 

"      pottles 

956 

"      drinking 

I0S9I 

Glass  for  windows 

147^  chests 

Gloves  stitched 

354  doz. 

140 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[582 


APPENDIX  II   (cont.) 


Gloves  plain  leather 
Grindlestones 
Gunpowder 
Haberdashery 
Hatts  beaver 
"      castor 
"      felt 
"      straw 
Hatbands  cruel 
Haircloth 

Harness  p.  coaches 
Holsters 
Hopps 

Horns  powder 
Iron  cast 

"      clockwork 

"      wrought 

"      nayles 
Lace  silver 
Lanthorn  leaves 
Lead  and  shott 
Leather  tanned 
Leather  wrought 
Lime 
Linnen 

"     ticking 
Malt 
Maps 
Oaker  red 
Oatmeal 

Pease 

Parchment 

Pictures 

Pewter 

Plate  wrought 

Saddles  great 
"         small 
side 

Skins  sheep  drest 
"       calve 

Shovells  shodd 

Silk  thrown 
"     wrought 

Soap  hard 
"     soft 

Starch 

Stays 

Steel  gad 

Steel 

Tinn 

Thread  brown 

Tobacco  pipes 

Watches 

Wax  sealing 


1745  2/3  doz. 

71J4  chaldron 

284  cwt.  I  q.  18  lbs. 

527  cwt.  0  q.  21  lbs. 

15  doz. 

582  2/3  doz. 

2059  5/12  doz. 

211  1/2  doz. 

3  doz. 

24  ps. 

5  pr. 

93  pr. 

3  cwt.  I  q.  IS  lbs. 

1  doz. 

Zy  cwt.  3  q.  14  lbs. 
3  cwt.  0  q. 
3806  cwt.  I  q.  10  lbs. 
3457  cwt.  I  q.  II  lbs. 

2  lbs. 
200 

12  F.  821  cwt.  I  q.  9  lbs. 

8  cwt.  2  q. 

no  c.  8g  lbs. 

9^  chaldron 

3360.^  ps. 

131  ps. 

575  q.  7  bu. 

I  q. 

I  q.  14  lbs. 

V2  bu. 

24  bu. 

2^  rolls 

I  cwt. 

853  cwt.  I  q.  8  lbs. 

601  oz. 

1144 

4293 

8 

20 

1  cwt.  2  q. 
53  1/6  doz. 
70354  lbs. 
29561/^  lbs. 

104  cwt.  3  q.  21  lbs. 
10  bbls. 
14  lbs. 
18  pr. 

2  q.  2  lbs. 
63  cwt. 

5  cwt.  2  q.  7  lbs. 

6  lbs. 
3984  gross 
I 

9  lbs. 


583]  APPENDIX  141 

APPENDIX  II   (cont.) 

Wool :  Bays  double  14  ps. 

"      barnstaple  Soy^  ps. 

"      minikin  323  2/3  ps. 

"     single  37y2  ps. 

Cloth  long  23J4  ps. 

"       short  249%^  ps. 

"       broad  18  ps. 

"       Spanish  30  ps. 

"       remnants  33851 K  lbs. 

Cotton  northern  63351  goads 

"         Welsh    plains  2646  goads 

Coverletts  wool  and  hair  2273  ps. 

Devon  doz.  double  96  ps. 

"  "      single  28  ps. 

Dozen  double  northern  49^  ps. 


"        single          " 

2  ps. 

Flannels 

11981  yds. 

Frize 

2666  yds. 

Kersies 

3172^  ps. 

Linsey  woolsey 

108  lbs. 

Pennistons  frized 

1305^  ps. 

"            unfrized 

36  ps. 

Perpetuanas 

72  ps. 

Ruggs  Irish 

2651 

Serges 

25527  lbs. 

Stockings  men's  worsted 

1327  doz. 

"              "      wool 

2497  1/6  doz. 

"            Irish 

547  1/3  doz. 

"            women's  wors.2j/2  doz. 

"         wool 

L5  doz. 

"            children's    " 

1220  10/12  doz. 

"               "      wors. 

174  doz. 

cloth 

2  doz. 

Wastcoats  wool 

7 

Shaloon 

20  lbs. 

Stuffs 

340031^ 

"       w.  hair 

32  lbs. 

"       w.  silk 

3912  lbs. 

Waistcoats  worsted 

2 

Tavestocks 

83  ps. 

Goods  at  value 

Blankets 



Bone  lace 



Brandy,  English 



Bisketts 

132  cwt.  3  q.  8  lbs, 

Cabinets 

I 

Cartwheels 



Chairs 



Escrutore 

— 

Files 

6  doz. 

Garden  seeds 

— 

Handkerchiefs  silk 

I  doz. 

Joyner's  wares 

— 

Iron  backs 

2 

495.  2.  4. 

78.  3.  6. 

2.  10.  0. 
89.  12.  0. 

3.  o.  0. 
29.  I.  0. 

318.  10.  9. 

12.  o.  o. 

I.  8.  0. 

3.  12.  o. 

1.  4.  o. 

29.  II.   0. 

2.  10.   0. 


142 


MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715 


[584 


APPENDIX  II  (cont.) 

Goods  at  value 

Looking  glasses  — 

Mathematical  Instruments  — 

Mil  stones  — 

Muslin  — 

Perukes  — 

Printing  press  and  letters      2 

Pictures  etc.  — 

Purbeck  stone  6  load 

Ruggs  17 

Red  paint  10  lbs. 

Tombstone  i 

Turnary  ware  — 

Thread  hose  3  pi". 

Walnut  plank  49 

Whipps  — 

Bellows  for  smiths  — 

Chests  of  drawers  — 

Clock  cases  3 

Corks  — 

Household  goods  — 

Millinary 

Salt 

Spirits 

Stationary  wares 

Tinware 

Upholstery 

Harness  for  horses 

Paper  6  rea 

Selves 

Canes 

Callicoes  5  ps. 

Cotton  ware 

Hoops 

Latten  ware 

Lasts  for  shoes 

Netts  and  lines 

Spice 

Yarn  wick 

Woollen  coverletts  133 


-72^/2  wey  15^  bu. 


17- 

10.  I. 

9- 
2. 

14.  0. 
8.  0. 

I. 

14.  4- 

99. 

19.  6. 

102. 

0.  0. 

3. 

0.  0. 

15- 

10.  0. 

8. 

9.  2. 

3- 

15.  0. 

5. 

1863. 

0. 

0.  0. 

9-  3- 
6.  0. 

10. 

0.  0, 

Q. 

10.  0. 

5. 
59- 

5-  0. 
18.  8. 

8. 

10.  0. 

21. 

19.  6. 

1728. 

13.8. 
II.  8. 

1342. 

6.  8. 

153- 

4.  0. 

253- 
601. 

5-  0. 
4.  2. 

10115. 

12.  6. 

13- 

2. 

19.  0. 
8.  0. 

23- 

0.  0. 

4- 

0.  0. 

4- 

0.  0. 

2. 

6.  0. 

45- 
24. 

8.  0. 
8.  6. 

3. 

6.  0. 

5- 

10.  0. 

37- 

12.  9. 

20. 
26. 

14.  3- 
12.  0. 

CHRISTMAS  1698-CHRISTMAS  1699.    EXPORT  OF  FOREIGN 

GOODS  FROM  ENGLAND  TO  MARYLAND  AND 

VIRGINIA 


Article 


Value 
L.  s.  d. 


Battery 

Anchovies 

Allom 

Brimstone 

Candles 

Capers 


158  cwt.  0  q. 
20  bbls. 
10  lbs. 
14  lbs. 
790  lbs. 
786  lbs. 


13  lbs. 


585] 


APPENDIX 


143 


APPENDIX  II  (cont.) 


Capps  Dutch 
Carpets  Turkey 
Cordage 
Drugs 

Farms  paper 
Frize  Irish 
Fustian 

Groceries :  Almonds 
Cinnamon 
Cloves 
Currants 
Figs 
Ginger 
Licoris 
Mace 
Nutmegs 
Pepper 
Prunes 
Raisins 
Rice 

Sugar  brown 
Hats  Irish 
Incle  wrought 

"      unwrought 
Indigo 

Iron  frying  pans 
"     nails 
"     stoves 
"     backs 
"      Spanish 
"      Swedish 
"     wrought 
Iron 

Linen :  Linen  barras 
Bengarols 
Blew  linen 
Callicoes 
Cambricks 
Brown  rolls 
Buckram 
Canvas  Hessens 
"         Et.  country 
"        Normandy 
"         packing 
"        spruce 
"        vittrey 
"        working 
Checks 
Cloth  British 
Siletia  Damask  napkins 
"        diaper  " 

"  tabling 

Dowlas 
East  country  broad 


gVi  doz. 
I 

14  cwt. 

I  cwt.  2  q.  3-)4  lbs. 

I  doz. 

9883  yds. 

6  ps.  and  58^  yds. 

6  lbs. 
3oJ4  lbs. 
38M  lbs. 

42  cwt.  2  q.  22,  lbs. 
I  cwt.  0  q.  20  lbs. 
0  cwt.  3  q.  II  lbs. 

0  cwt.  0  q.  2  lbs. 
12^  lbs. 

1381^  lbs. 
1689  lbs. 

15  cwt. 

198  cwt.  I  q.  5  lbs. 

1  cwt.  o  q.  22  lbs. 
83  cwt.  3  q-  4  lbs. 
3  doz. 

8  7/12  doz. 

7  lbs. 
Z2>  lbs. 

3  cwt.  3  q-  II  lbs. 

I  cwt. 

5 

6 

40  cwt. 
68  cwt. 
I  cwt. 

1  T. 

12  c.  I  q.  18  ells 

2  lbs. 
7  ps. 

2476  17/20  ps. 

41  ps. 
60  ells 
5  ps. 

20  c.  o  q.  6  ells 
I  c.  I  q.  ID  ells 

5  c.  o  q.  II  ells 
I  c.  I  q.  15  ells 
27  c.  0  q.  17  ells 
476  c.  2  q.  20  ells 
I  q.  15  ells 
68sK  ps. 

92  ps. 
177^  yds. 
2573  13/20  yds. 
276  yds. 
748  ps. 

6  c.  2  q.  o  ells 


144 


MARYLAND   TRADE,   1689-I715 


[586 


APPENDIX  II   (cont.) 


East  Country  narrow 
Flanders  linen 
Germany  broad 

"  narrow 

Harfords 
Hamborough 
Hamells 
Hinterlands 
Holland  linen 
"  duck 

Irish  linen 
Ghenting 
Renting 
Sletia  lawns 
Huckabuck 
Lochrams 
Ozenbrigs 
Poldavies 
Polonia  broad 

narrow 
Russia 
Scotch  twill 
"        linen 
"        ticking 
Ticking  Flanders 
"         East  country 
"         Hamborough 
Ticks  turnall 
Lampblack 
Oil  olive 
"    linseed 
"    sweet 
"  trayne 
Mittings  wadmall 
Paper  ordinary 
"      copy 
"       royal 
"      demy 
Plate  wrought 
Potts  iron 

"      stone 
Quilts  calico 
Rozen 

Ruggs  Irish 
Salt  Spanish 
"     French 
Silk  Italian  thrown 
"     Turkey  raw 
"      Dutch  wrought 
"      Bengal  plain 
"      Bengal  wrought 
"      Persian 
Shruff 
Smelts 


11  c.  I  q.  15  ells 
1482^  ells 

525  c.  2  q.  15  ells 
3914  c.  3  q.  14  ells 
45  c.  3  q-  9  ells 
490  ells 
328  ells 
7  c.  ells 
22663  i/io  ells 

13  c.  2  q.  24  ells 
196  c.  3  q.  II  ells 
28  ps.  581  ells 

10  ps. 

1638  ps.  and  34  yds. 

621  yds. 

9  c.  2  q.  8  ells  and  54^^  ps. 
32874  1/3  ells 

5  bolts 

0  c.  3  q.  20  ells 
4  c.  o  q.  12  ells 

1  c.  2  q.    o  ells 
158  CO  q.  23  ells 

163  c.  o  q.  2Z  ells  and  57  ps. 

83  c.  oq.  16  ells 

65^  ps. 

172  yds. 

4  ps. 

57  ps. 

I  cwt.  3  q.  22  lbs. 

7^  gal. 

85  gal. 

280  gal. 

45  gal. 

17H  doz. 

219  reams 

10  reams 
4  reams 

12  reams 
71  oz. 
1654 

344  cast 
9 

14  lbs. 
30  ps. 

23  wey  32^4  bu. 

2,2  wey  Z2,  bu. 

214  lbs. 

^  lb. 

141  lbs.  13  oz. 

16  ps. 

I  lb. 

3  ps. 

3  q.  10  lbs. 

40  lbs. 


587] 


APPENDIX 


145 


Soap 

Stockings  worst. 

"  wadmall 

Stones  quern  large 
"  "       small 

dog 
mill 
Steel  long 
Stuff  Irish 

"      Guinea 
Thread  Irish 
"       Bridges 
Outnall 
"       vvhited  brown 
Tarras 
Tobacco 
Toys 
Tallow 
Twine 
Turpentine 
Taffeties 
Wrought  brass 
Wine  Canary 
"      Florence 
"       Port 
"      Rhenish 
"       Spanish 
"       Sherry 
Wood  logwood 
"      redwood 
"      pipe  staves 
Whale  bone 
Wool  cotton 
Vinegar 
Yarn  cotton 

"       Floretta 
Goods  at  value 
Bugle  great 
Chintz 

Derribands  large 
Grocery 

Mullmuls  flowered 
Muslin 
Neckcloth  flowered 

"  plain 

Nilleas 
Nickanees 
Romalls 
Sallampores 
Shirts 
Soosays 
Shallbafts 
Spice 

Stuffs  Guinea 
10 


APPENDIX  II   (cont.) 

277  cwt,  o  q.  17  lbs. 
3  doz. 

10  doz. 
3  5/6  last 
40  5/6  last  II  pr. 

2  1/3  last 

44 

11  cwt.  2  q. 
23  yds. 
40  ps. 
72  cwt. 
SVz  doz.  lbs. 
60  lbs. 
113  doz.  lbs. 

3  bbls. 
210  lbs. 
I  parcell 
8  cwt. 

1  cwt. 
8  lbs. 
23  ps. 

2  q. 
16  pipes  I  hhd.  60  gals. 

1  pipe  15  gal. 

12  pipes  I  hhd.  41  gal. 
ij^  awm  34  gal. 

2  p.  2  hhd. 

3  p.  I  hhd.  6  gal. 
604  cwt. 

4  cwt. 

134  c.  20  no. 
12  cwt.  0  q.  22  lbs. 
3  lbs. 
31^  gal. 
56  lbs. 
16  lbs. 


71S  lbs. 

64  ps. 

5  ps. 

262  cwt.  2  q. 

2  ps. 

26654  ps.  12  yds. 

36  ps. 

431  ps. 

50  ps. 

55  ps. 

684  5/6  ps. 

22  ps. 

289 

12  ps. 

S  ps. 

791  lbs. 

120  ps. 


146 


MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715 
APPENDIX  II  (cont.) 


[588 


Goods  at  value 
Tanjeebs 
Tepoys 
Drugs 
Glassware 
Bafts 
Borelaps 
Dorcas 

Handkerchiefs 
Mohabut  banees 
Mullmuls  plain 
Putkeys 
Striped  linen 
Tapsells 
Stuffs  Fanna 
Stockings  Scotch 
Cravats  Scotch 
Earthware 
Printed  linen 
Spirits 

Thread  Scotch 
Trunks 
Linen 
Brandy 
Coffee 

Crocus  linen  . 

Diaper  napkins  fringed 
FUnts 

Garlicks  narrow 
Ginghams 
Mum 
Chocolate 
Earth  red 
Fanns  silk 
Linen  aprons 
Bettlees 
Birampants 
Chuckleys 
Hunnims 
Nightrails 
Penniascoes 
Savagucees 
Pimento 

Slik?Turkey  wrought 
Taffeties 
Colored  Imen 
Stuffs  India 
Thread 


II  lbs. 


I9>4  ps. 

33 

I  cwt.  I  q- 
I  parcell 
6  ps. 
154  ells 

6  ps. 
98  ps. 

7  ps- 
24  ps- 

15  ps-  , 

166  ells  115  yds. 
30  ps. 
2  ps. 
103/4  doz. 

221  yds.  37  ps- 
29  gals. 
22  lbs. 


16  gal. 
104  lbs. 
18  ps. 
2  doz. 

1000 
20  ells 

36  ps. 

60  gal. 

43  lbs. 

3  cwt. 

85 

6 

2  ps. 
29  ps. 
5  ps- 
2  ps. 
60  ps. 
32  ps. 

ID   ps. 

3  lbs. 

2  cases 

3  ps- 
23  ps- 
367 
I  ps. 


52.  12.  6. 
18.    o.  0. 


2.  10. 

45-  17- 


222.  19-  9^- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

MANUSCRIPTS 

A.  Public  Record  Office,  London,  England. 

1.  Colonial  Office  Papers. 

2.  State  Papers,  Domestic. 

3.  Treasury  Papers,  1689-1715. 

4.  Treasury  Accounts,  Revenue  Yearly,  vols.  i-iv. 

5.  Audit  Office,  Accounts  Various,  589. 

6.  Declared  Accounts  of  the  Audit  Office,  1688-1715. 

7.  Declared  Accounts  of  the  Pipe  Office,  168S-1715. 

8.  Customs  Accounts : 

a.  Ledgers  of  Imports  and  Exports,  vols,  i-xvi. 

b.  Inspector  General's  Accounts,  vols.  i-x. 

9.  Privy  Council  Registers,  1688-1720. 

B.  House  of  Lords,  London. 

I.  House  of  Lords  MSS.    Answer  of  Commissioners  of  Trade 
to  an  order  relating  to  the  Tobacco  Trade,  June  5,  1714. 

C.  British  Aluseum,  London. 

1.  Additional  MSS.  8832,  10453,  28089,  22265,  29600,  29903,  361 10. 

2.  Egerton  MSS.  921,  2395. 

3.  Harleian  MSS.  1238. 

4.  Sloane  MSS.  1815,  2717,  2902,  2291. 

5.  Stowe  MSS.  316,  324. 

D.  Privy  Council  Office,  London. 

I.  Privy  Council  Papers,  1702,  Bundles  i  and  2. 

E.  Royal  Society,  London. 

I.  Letter  Books,  I,  i,  183. 

F.  Society   for  the   Propagation   of   the   Gospel   in  Foreign   Parts, 

London. 

1.  A.  MSS.,  vols.  i-v. 

2.  B.  MSS.,  vol.  i. 

G.  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford. 

I.  Tanner  MSS.  xxxi,  137-140. 

H.  Pennsylvania  Historical  Society,  Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania. 
I.  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series,  Plantations  General.    Transcripts. 

I.  Land  Commissioner's  Office,  Annapolis,  Maryland. 

1.  Records  of  Textts  Testaments  Administrations  etc.,  vols,  x, 

xii,  xiii. 

2.  Inventories  and  Accounts,  vols,  xv,  xvi,  xix. 

147 


148  MARYLAND   TRADE,  1689-I715  [59O 

PRINTED  RECORDS 

1.  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council  of  England,  Colonial  Series.     Edited  by 

W.  L.  Grant  and  J.  Munro.    Vols,  i-iv,  vi.    Hereford,  1908-1912. 

2.  Calendar  of   State   Papers,   Colonial   Series,  America  and   West 

Indies.     20  vols.     London,  1860-1912. 

3.  Hening,  W.  W.     The  Statutes-at-Large,  being  a  Collection  of  all 

the  Laws  of  Virginia.     13  vols.     Philadelphia  and  New  York, 
1819-1823. 

4.  Maryland  Historical  Society. 

a.  Archives  of  Maryland.     Edited  by  W.  H.  Browne,     ss  vols. 

Baltimore,  1883-1913. 

b.  Fund  Publications.     37  vols.     Baltimore,  1867-1901.     No.  15 : 

G.  Alsop.  Character  of  the  Province  of  Maryland.     1880. 
Nos.  28,  34,  35 :  Calvert  Papers.     1889,  1894,  1899. 

5.  Rymer,  T.     Foedera.     First  edition.     20  vols.     London,  1704-1735. 

6.  Statutes   of   the   Realm.     Printed   by  command   of   His   Majesty 

King  George  III.     11  vols.     London,  1810-1828. 


CONTEMPORARY  ACCOUNTS  OF  THE  COLONY 

1.  Alsop,  G.     A  Character  of  the  Province  of  Maryland.     London, 

1666.  Reprints:  Shea,  Early  Southern  Tracts.  New  York, 
1869;  Maryland  Historical  Society,  Fund  Publication,  no.  15. 
Baltimore,  1880;  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland,  1633-1684. 
Edited  by  C.  C.  Hall.     New  York,  1910. 

2.  An   Account  of  the   Colony  of   the  Lord   Baron   of   Baltimore 

(1633).  „        , 

The  Latin  original  of  this  account  was  transcribed.  1832, _  by 
Father  William  McSherry  from  the  Archives  of  the  Society 
of  Jesus  in  Rome.  It  has  been  translated  and  printed  in  sev- 
eral places :  Peter  Force,  Tracts  and  Other  Papers  relating 
principally  to  the  Origin  Settlement  and  Progress  of  the  Colo- 
nies in  North  America  from  the  discovery  to  1776.  4  vols. 
Washington,  1836-1847.  Vol.  iv,  no.  12;  Maryland  Historical 
Society,  Fund  Publication,  no.  7;  Narratives  of  Early  Mary- 
land, 1633-1684.  A  printed  copy  of  another  translation  of 
this  same  document  may  be  found  among  the  Roman  Catholic 
Archives  in  Westminster,  under  the  title,  A  Declaration  of  the 
Lord  Baltemore's  Plantation  in  Mary-land  nigh  upon  Vir- 
ginia: manifesting  the  Nature,  Quality,  Condition,  and  rich 
Utilities  it  contayneth.     Arch.  Westmonasterium,  xxvii,  8. 

3.  A   Relation   of   Marvland.     London,    1635.     Reprints:    J.    Sabin, 

New  York.  1865 ;  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland.  1633-1684. 

4.  A   Relation   of   the   Successful   Beginnings   of  the  Lord   Balte- 

more's Plantation  in  Maryland.  London,  1634.  Reprinted  by 
Shea,  Early  Southern  Tracts,  vol.  i.     Albany,  1865. 

5.  The  Lord  Baltemore's  Case,  Concerning  the  Province  of  Mary- 

land, adjoyning  to  Virginia  in  America.  London,  1653.  Re- 
printed in  Maryland  Historical  Magazine,  vol.  iv,  pp.  171-182. 

6.  Virginia  and  Maryland,  or  The  Lord  Baltamore's  printed  Case, 

uncased  and  answered.  London,  1655.  Reprints:  P.  Force, 
Tracts,  vol.  ii.  no.  9;  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland,  1633-1684. 

7.  Babylon's    Fall    in    Maryland.     Published    by    Leonard    Strong. 

London,  1655.  Reprints:  Maryland  Historical  Magazine,  vol. 
iii,  pp.  228-240;  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland,  1633-1684. 


59 1]  BIBLIOGRAPHY  1 49 

8.  A  just  and  Clcre  Refutation  of  a  false  and  scandalous  Pamphlet, 

Entitled  Babylon's  Fall  in  Maryland,  &c.  By  John  Langford. 
London,  1655.  Reprints :  Maryland  Historical  Magazine,  vol. 
iv,  pp.  42-64;  Narratives  of  Early  Maryland,  1633-1684. 

9.  An  Additional  brief  Narrative  of  a  late  Bloody  Design  against 

the  Protestants  in  Anne  Arundel  County,  and  Severn,  in  Mary- 
land in  the  Country  of  Virginia.  By  Roger  Heaman.  London, 
1655- 

10.  Hammond  vs.  Heamans.     By  John  Hammond.     London,  1655. 

11.  Leah  and   Rachel,  or,   the  Two  P'ruitfull   Sisters   Virginia  and 

Mary-land.  By  John  Hammond.  London,  1656.  Reprints : 
P.  Force,  Tracts,  vol.  iii,  no.  14;  Narratives  of  Early  Mary- 
land, 1633-1684. 


GENERAL  SECONDARY  WORKS 

1.  Anderson,  A.     An  Historical  and   Chronological   Deduction  of 

the  Origin  of  Commerce.     6  vols.     Dublin,  1790. 

2.  Beer,  G.  L.     The  Origins  of  the  British  Colonial  System,  1578- 

1660.     New  York.  igo8. 

3. .     The  Old  Colonial  System,  1660-1754.     Part  L     2  vols. 

New  York,  1912. 

4.  Bozman,  J.  L.     History  of  Maryland  (1633-1660).     2  vols.    Bal- 

timore. 1837. 

5.  Browne,  W.  H.     Maryland,  the  History  of  a  Palatinate.     Boston, 

1884. 

6.  Bruce,  P.  A.     The  Economic  History  of  Virginia  in  the  Seven- 

teenth Century.    2  vols.     New  York,  1896. 

7.  Child,    Sir  Josiah.     A  new   discourse  of   trade.     London,   First 

edition,  1692.     Fourth  edition,  1740. 

8.  Cunningham,  W.     Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce 

during  the  Early  and  Middle  Ages.     Fifth   edition,  London, 
1910. 

9. .     Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce  in  Modern 

Times.     Fourth  edition,  2  vols.,  London,  1907. 

10.  Gee,  Joshua.     The  Trade  and  Navigation  of  Great  Britain  Con- 

sidered.    First  edition,  1729.     Sixth  edition,  Glasgow,   1755. 

11.  Hart,  A.  B.,  editor.     The  American  Nation:  A  History.    26 vols. 

and  index  vol.     New  York,  1904-1908. 
Vol.  iv.     Tyler,  L.  G.     England  in  America.     1904. 
Vol.  v.     Andrews,  C.  M.     Colonial  Self-Government.     1904. 
Vol.  vi.     Greene,  E.  B.     Provincial  America.     1905. 

12.  Keith.  T.     The  Commercial  Relations  of  England  and  Scotland, 

1603-1707.     Girton  College  Studies,  vol.  i.     Cambridge,  1910. 

13.  Kilty,   W.     The  Landholder's  Assistant  and  Land  Office  Guide 

for  Maryland.     Baltimore,  1808. 

14.  McMahon,   J.    V.   L.     Historical    View   of   the    Government   of 

Maryland.     Baltimore,  1831. 

15.  MacPherson,  D.     Annals  of  Commerce.     London,  1805. 

16.  McSherry,  J.     History  of  Maryland;   to  the  year   1848.     Balti- 

more, 1849. 
17. .     History  of  Maryland.     Edited  and  continued  by  Bart- 

lett  B.  James.     Baltimore,  1904. 
18.  Mereness,   N.   D.     Maryland   as  a  Proprietary   Province.     New 

York,  1901. 


150  MARYLAND   TRADE^  1689-I715  [592 

19.  Neill,  E.  D.    Terra  Mariae.     Philadelphia,  1867. 

20.  Osgood,  H.  L.    The  American  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Cen- 

tury.    3  vols.     New  York,  1904-1907. 

21.  Rogers,  J.  E.  T.     A  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices  in  Eng- 

land.    7  vols,  in  8.     Oxford,  1866-1902. 

22.  Scharf,  J.  T.     History  of  Maryland.    3  vols.    Baltimore,  1879. 


MONOGRAPHS  AND  ARTICLES 

1.  Beer,    G.    L.     The    Commercial    Policy    of    England    toward    the 

American  Colonies.     Columbia  University  Studies  in  History, 
Economics  and  Public  Law.     Vol.  iii,  no.  2.     New  York,  1893. 

2.  Brackett,  J.  R.     The  Negro  in  Maryland.     Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 

versity Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science.     Extra  vol. 
vi.     Baltimore,  1889. 

3.  Jacobstein,  M.     The  Tobacco  Industry  in  the  United  States.     Co- 

lumbia University  Studies  in  History,  Economics  and  Public 
Law.     Vol.  xxvi,  no.  3.     New  York,  1907. 

4.  Lord,  E.  L.     Industrial  Experiments  in  the  British  Colonies  of 

North  America.     Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  His- 
torical and  Political  Science.     Extra  vol.  xvii.     Baltimore,  1898. 

5.  McCormac,  E.  I.     White  Servitude  in  Maryland.     Johns  Hopkins 

University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science.     Vol. 
xxii,  nos.  3,  4.     Baltimore,  1904. 

6.  Sparks,  F.  E.     The  Causes  of  the  Revolution  of  1689  in  Maryland. 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political 
Science.     Vol.  xiv,  nos.  11,  12.     Baltimore.  1896. 

7.  Steiner,  B.  C.    The  Protestant  Revolution  in  Maryland.    Annual 

Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association,  1897,  p.  279. 
Washington,  1898. 
8. .    The  Restoration  of  the  Proprietary  of  Maryland.     An- 
nual Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association,  1899,  p. 
229.    Washington,  1900. 


;ndex. 


Acts  of  Parliament,  30  n.,  43,  44, 

45,  46,   50,   55,   56,   71,  90,  97, 

104,    130.      See    also    Acts    of 

Trade. 
Acts    of   Trade,    30,    50,   59,    82, 

85  n.,    108,    116,    118,    119,    120, 

121,  122,  125,  127,  128. 
Admiralty    court    in    Maryland, 

121  and  n.,  122  and  n. 
Admiralty  in  England,  92  n.,  121, 

126. 
Africa,  76,  79  and  n.,  80,  81,  107, 

131- 

Andros,  Governor,  16  n.,  72. 

Annapolis,   12,   13  n.,  47. 

Annapolis  District,  32  n.,  2>2>  n., 
34  n.,  79  n.,  89. 

Anne  Arundel  County,  114. 

Appendices,  I,  134-138;  II,  139- 
146. 

Asiento,  the,  80. 

Assembly  of  Maryland,  16,  23 
and  n.,  24,  27,  29,  30  n.,  53,  68, 
73,  74,  76  and  n.,  90,  93,  96, 
97,  98,  99  n.,  104,  106,  127.  See 
also  Laws  of  Maryland. 

Associators  in  Maryland,  22  n., 
117. 

Azores,  the,  81,  82,  108,  109. 

Baltic  countries,  the,  53,  100,  loi, 

102. 
Baltimore,  Lord,  11,  24,  39  n.,  42, 

47,  49,  53,  67,  89,  127. 
Baltimore  County,  114. 
Barbadoes,  16,  17,  36  n.,  79  n.,  80, 

81,  109,  110-113,  117  n. 
Beef  and  pork,  20,   128,  129  n. 
Berkeley,  Governor,  22  n. 
Bermuda,  20  n.,  109,  112,  113. 
Bibliography,  147-150. 
Bills  of  exchange,  64  n.,  103,  105- 

107. 
Blakiston,    Governor,    14,   29,  80 

n..  119,  122,   123.   126,  131. 
Blakiston,    Nehemiah,    Collector 

of  Potomac,  Ii9n. 
Blathwayt,  William,  48,  53. 


Board  of  Trade,  14,  17  n.,  18, 
20  n.,  27,  29,  30,  38,  39  n.,  41, 
43,  48,  53,  64,  66,  71,  74,  75,  77, 
78  n.,  79  n.,  82,  86,  90,  94,  99, 
100,  102,  104,  106  n.,  108,  119  n., 
120,  121,  123  n.,  127  n. 

Bonds  and  securities,  116,  117, 
122-125. 

Braines,  family  of  merchants,  96. 

Browne,  Peregrine,  96. 

Brownes,  family  of  merchants, 
96. 

Calvert  County,  114. 
Campeachy  coast,  82. 
Carolinas,  21  n.,  38,  109,  112,  113, 

120  n.,  126. 
Cattle  and  hogs,   19-20,  25. 
Cecil  County,  74  n.,  114,  128,  129 

n.,   130  n. 
Cecil  County  District,  32  n.,  33  n. 
Certificates.       See     Bonds     and 

securities. 
Charles  County,  27,  114. 
Chesapeake  Bay,  9,  69  n.,  72,  126. 
Coin.     See  Money  currency. 
Collectors,   50,   51,   93,    116,    117, 

iign.,  122,  123,  127. 
College   of   William   and   Mary, 

51  and  n. 
Colonial  government.    See  Mary- 
land; Laws  of  Maryland. 
Colonies,  Spanish.     See  Spain. 
Commissioners  of  the  Customs, 

43,  son.,  51  n.,  66,  81  n.,  99 n., 

116,  117,  118,  119  n.,  120  n.,  121, 
123  n.,  125,  126  n. 

Committee  of  Accounts  in  Eng- 
land, 48. 

Convicts,  English,  78. 

Convoys,  41,  91-95,  131.  See  also 
Fleets. 

Coode,  Captain  Peter,  126. 

Coopers  and  carpenters,  70. 

Copley,  Governor,  91,  97,  106  n., 

117,  118,  121  n.,  127. 
Corbett,  John,  48. 

Cotton,  43,  64,  68,  69,  70,  145. 


151 


152 


INDEX 


[594 


Council  of  Maryland,  ii,  i?"-, 
27,  67,  70,  71,  90  n.,  93,  105  n., 
106  n.,  108,  109  n.,  113,  iign. 

Council  of  Virginia.  See  Vir- 
ginia. 

Customs  duties,  in  England,  37, 
40,  43-45,  46,  63,  117  n.;  in 
Maryland,  12  and  n.,  13,  20,  47, 
48,  49,  SO,  72,-  74,  78,  79 "-,  106, 
115,  116,  117,  127,  128,  129. 

Darien,  119. 

Day,  a  pirate,  131- 

Delaware  Bay,  69  n.,  112,  130  n. 

Dorchester  County,  114. 

Eastern  Shore,  furs  from,  14; 
apples  from,  19;  suitable  for 
tar  and  pitch,  54;  linen  and 
woollen  industry  on,  71 ;  little 
tobacco  from,  89  and  n.,  115; 
ship-building  on,   115. 

Edloe  V.  Hammond,  125  n. 

Embargo  on  ships,  91,  92. 

England,  no  fish  exported  to,  11; 
furs  exported  to,  13-14;  senti- 
ment against  tobacco  in,  21,  22 
n.,  42,  52,  53 ;  Spanish  tobacco 
excluded  from,  22  and  n. ;  to- 
bacco growing  forbidden  in, 
22 ;  market  monopolized  by  co- 
lonial tobacco,  22,  2T,,  27 ;  bad 
tobacco  shipped  to,  25,  26  and 
n. ;  amount  of  tobacco  exported 
to,  30-36;  price  of  tobacco 
in,  37,  39.  40,  42;  sale  of 
tobacco  in,  34-38,  102-103; 
duties  on  tobacco  in,  40,  43- 
44,  99-100;  revenue  on  tobacco 
in.  45-46;  smuggling  of  tobacco 
repressed  in,  46;  export  of 
naval  stores  to,  56,  57,  134-138; 
amount  of  British  and  foreign 
goods  imported  from,  58-60, 
64-66,  71,  81,  139-146;  small 
amounts  of  food-stuffs  from, 
60;  value  of  goods  from,  62- 
64;  balance  of  trade  against, 
63-64;  white  servants  from, 
76-79;  shipping  from,  85-88; 
convoys  and  embargo  in,  91- 
92;  reexportation  of  tobacco 
from,  100-102;  colonial  ships 
in  Maryland  trading  to,  iio- 
113;  Maryland  vessels  built  or 
owned  in,  114.     See  also  Acts 


of  Parliament ;  English  govern- 
ment; Acts  of  Trade;  Mer- 
chants, London ;  Trade,  illicit. 

English  government,  regulation 
and  protection  of  tobacco  trade 
by,  21,  22,  24,  30,  41,  42,  43-45, 
46,  49,  50,  51,  66,  85  n.,  89-90, 
97,  98,  99,  100,  loi,  102;  settles 
rates  of  coins,  30;  care  for  co- 
lonial revenues,  49,  50;  regula- 
tion and  protection  of  naval 
stores,  52,  53,  55;  encourages 
imports  to  Maryland,  58,  63, 
64,  66-67 ;  attitude  toward 
towns  in  Maryland,  66,  89,  90; 
discourages  manufactures  in 
Maryland,  66-67,  68;  regula- 
tion of  fleets  and  convoys,  91- 
92,  94-95 ;  influence  of  London 
merchants  on,  95,  97,  98,  99- 
102,  106 ;  asks  Maryland  to 
share  expense  of  Indian  wars, 
105-106;  action  against  illicit 
trade,  120-121 ;  attitude  to- 
ward pirates,  129-130.  See 
also  Acts  of  Parliament;  Acts 
of  Trade. 

Exports  from  Maryland,  fish, 
11;  furs,  11-14,  128,  129  n.; 
food-stuffs,  15-17,  18;  fruit, 
18-19;  beef  and  pork,  20,  128, 
129  n. ;  tobacco,  21,  31-36,  75  ; 
naval  stores,  52,  53,  56-57,  I34- 
138;  iron,  72-73;  hats,  73'^-) 
European  goods,  72,-7S,  128. 
See  also  Tobacco. 

Factors,  38,  103. 

Fish,  lo-ii,  21,  82,  S3. 

Flax.    See  Hemp. 

Fleets,  time  of  arrival  in  colony, 
31  n.,  41  n.,  94-95  :  size  of  Eng- 
lish, 32  n.,  33  n.,  85-87.  91;  de- 
pendence of  planter  on,  38; 
controversy  over  annual  num- 
ber of,  40,  41,  42,  94-95 ;  Lon- 
don, 31  n.,  75,  79  n.,  80,  87- 
88,  107;  outport,  38,  88;  vessels 
to  Maryland  sail  in,  95.  See 
also  Convoys;  Embargo. 

Food-stuffs,  15-18,  21,  60,  ig8, 
129  n. 

Forestalling,  104-105. 

France,  42,  53,  91,  92,  93,  100, 
loi,  102,  108,  115  n. 

Fruit,  18-19. 


595] 


INDEX 


153 


Fur    trade,    10,    11-14,    21,    128, 

129  n. 
Fyall,  81,  108  n.,  112. 

Germany,  loi. 

Guinea  coast.    See  Africa. 

Hart,    Governor,    18,  27,   ^2,  82, 

87,  US- 
Hats,  73  n.,  140,  143. 
Hemp,  52,  53,  54,  55,  56,  67,  68, 

69,70,  71,  139- 
Hewitt.  John,  62. 
Hill.  Abraham,  25  n. 
Holland,  25,  100,  loi. 
Hungary,  lOi. 

Imports,  from  English  colonies, 
15,  17-18,  19,  82-83;  British 
manufactures,  58,  59-67,  129- 
142 ;  reexported  foreign  goods, 
59-64,  142-146;  variety  of  Brit- 
ish and  foreign.  59^2;  small 
quantities  of  English  food- 
stuffs, 60;  distribution  of  Brit- 
ish and  foreign,  60-62;  value 
of  British  and  foreign,  62-64; 
amount  from  England  too 
small,  64-67;  white  servants, 
76-78 ;  negroes,  64  n.,  76,  79- 
81 ;  directly  from  foreign 
countries,  79-82. 

Indians,  11,  12,  14,  15,  19,  19  n. 

Ireland,  71,  76,  78,  91,  100,  Ii8n. 

Iron,  ^2-^z,  140, 143- 

Jamaica,  79  n.,  82  n.,  no.  113. 
Jennings.  Governor,  64,  68  n. 
Jones,  Hugh,   10,  28,  61,  71,  81, 
105. 

Kent  County,  114. 

King,  Major  Robert,  12  n.,  13  n., 

(i2. 

Latitudoes,  82. 

Lawrence,  Sir  Thomas,  41  n.,  43, 
89  n. 

Laws  of  Maryland,  on  fur  trade, 
11-12;  on  planting  corn,  15; 
prohibiting  importation  of 
food-stuffs  from  Pennsylvania, 
18,  83;  protecting  cattle.  19  n. ; 
duty  on  exported  food-stuffs, 
20;  on  quality  of  tobacco,  2,z 
and  n.,  26;  two  shillings  duty 


on  exported  tobacco,  39  n.,  47; 
three  pence  duty  for  governor, 
47 ;  three  pence  duty  for  prov- 
ince, 47 ;  tonnage  duty,  49  n  ; 
on  growing  hemp  and  flax,  53, 
55-56;  against  exportation  of 
untanned  leather,  67,  72;  en- 
couraging making  of  linen  and 
woollen  cloth,  67;  on  gage  of 
tobacco  hogsheads,  70,  97,  98, 
99  n. ;  on  European  goods  ex- 
ported from  Maryland,  73,  74, 
75,  76;  on  establishment  of 
Church,  75  n. ;  forbidding  im- 
portation of  convicts,  78;  im- 
posing duty  on  Irish  Catholic 
servants,  78;  imposing  duty  on 
imported  white  servants,  78; 
establishing  towns,  89,  90;  on 
publication  of  freight  rates  on 
tobacco,  96;  against  squeezing 
tobacco  hogsheads,  98;  on 
stores  to  be  kept  in  towns,  103- 
104;  against  forestalling,  104- 
105 ;  on  value  of  foreign  coins, 
105;  on  protested  bills  of  ex- 
change, 106,  107 ;  to  encourage 
ship-building,    115. 

Leather,  67,  72,  140. 

Linen,  43.  65,  67,  70,  71,  ^2,  79  n., 
140,  143-144. 

Liquors,  25,  81,  82,  128,  141,  145, 
146. 

Lisbon,   17  n.,  81  n.,   108. 

Liverpool,  41  n.,  88,  iii. 

Lloyd,  Edward,  President  of  the 
Council  in  Maryland,  17  n.,  27, 
38,  39  n.,  80  n.,  99,   104  n. 

Lloyd,  Madam  Henrietta,  60,  61. 

London,  31  n.,  75,  80,  87-88,  107, 
no,  112. 

Lord  High  Admiral.  See  Admi- 
ralty in  England. 

Lords  Committee  of  Trade  of 
the  Privy  Council,  52. 

Lords  of  the  Admiralty.  See 
Admiralty  in  England. 

Lords  of  the  Council.  See  Privy 
Council. 

Lords  of  the  Treasury.  See 
Treasury. 

Lords  of  Trade,  65,  126  n. 

Lower  House  of  Assembly  in 
Maryland,  11,  12,  16,  24,  29,  40, 
72,  75  n. 


154 


INDEX 


[596 


Madeira,  17  n.,  81,  82,  108,  iii, 
112,  113. 

Manufactures  in  Maryland,  cot- 
ton, linen,  and  woollen  goods, 
43,  64,  65,  66,  69.  70-71,  72; 
discouraged  by  English  gov- 
ernment, 43,  66-67,  68 ;  few  co- 
lonial, 59,  68-73  ;  royal  govern- 
ors fear,  65-66,  68;  encouraged 
by  colonial  government,  67-68; 
leather  goods,  67,  T2;  cooper- 
age and  carpentry,  70;  iron, 
72,  "jy,   hats,   73  n. 

Markham,  Governor,  131. 

Maryland,  settlements,  9-10;  fish- 
eries, lo-ii;  fur  trade,  11-14; 
food-stuffs,  15-18;  fruit,  18- 
19;  cattle  and  hogs,  19-20;  to- 
bacco, the  staple  of,  iS,  18,  21, 
23,  24,  25 ;  quality  and  quantity 
of  tobacco  in,  23-26;  poverty 
of  colonists,  27-28,  39  and  n., 
6s ;  tobacco  medium  of  ex- 
change in,  23,  28-30,  105; 
amount  of  tobacco  exported 
from,  30-36;  price  of  tobacco 
in,  36-42;  effect  of  tobacco 
duties  on,  40,  44-45 ;  fleets  in, 
40-42,  94-95 ;  revenue  in  Eng- 
land on  tobacco  from,  42-46; 
revenue  from  exported  tobacco 
in,  47-51;  salary  of  royal  gov- 
ernor in,  47-49;  naval  stores 
in,  52-57,  134-138;  British  and 
foreign  goods  imported  into, 
58-60.  139-146;  distribution  of 
imports  in,  60-62;  value  and 
amount  of  British  imports  in, 
62-65 ;  manufacturing  in,  43, 
65-73;  attitude  of  colonial  gov- 
ernment toward  manufacturing 
in,  67-68;  amount  of  manufac- 
turing in,  68-73 ;  dispute  with 
Pennsylvania,  73-76 ;  importa- 
tion of  white  servants  into,  76- 
78;  of  negroes,  79-81,  107;  im- 
ports from  foreign  countries 
directly,  81-82;  from  English 
colonies,  82-83;  number  of  ves- 
sels trading  from  England  to. 
85-87;  from  London,  87-88; 
from  outports,  88;  methods  of 
loading  tobacco  in,  89-90;  con- 
voys to,  91-95 ;  influence  of 
London  merchants  on  tobacco 
trade  in,  95-99;  freight  charges 


in,  ZT,  96;  bulk  tobacco  in,  96- 
97;  size  of  tobacco  hogsheads 
in,  97-99;  influence  of  London 
merchants  on  political  affairs 
in,  102;  methods  of  selling  to- 
bacco in,  102-104;  forestaUing 
in,  104-105;  bills  of  exchange 
used  in,  105-107 ;  trade  routes 
to  foreign  countries,  107-109; 
to  English  colonies,  109-114; 
shipping  owned  in,  109,  114- 
116;  illicit  trade  in,  1 16-129; 
pirates  in,  129-132.  See  also 
Laws  of  Maryland;  Tobacco; 
Merchants,  London ;  Trade, 
illicit;  Pirates. 

Massachusetts,  16  n.,  49. 

Meech,  Thomas,  126. 

Merchants,  English.  27,  28.  37, 
38,  39,  41,  58,  (i2,  64,  65,  66,  67. 
68,  ^2,  76,  94,  95,  100,  103,  104, 
105,  106.  See  also  Merchants, 
London. 

Merchants,  London,  sell  tobacco 
for  planters  on  commission,  37, 
38,  65 ;  favor  annual  fleet,  40, 
41 ;  influence  tobacco  trade  in 
England,  44-45.  46,  95.  99;  peti- 
tion for  convoys,  29,  131 ; 
names  of  families  of,  95-96; 
influence  on  freight  rates,  95, 
96;  influence  on  English  gov- 
ernment, 95,  106  and  n. ;  de- 
termine methods  of  packing 
and  shipping  tobacco,  96,  97, 
98,  99;  influence  on  trade  with 
Continent,  100,  loi,  102;  on 
political  affairs  in  Maryland, 
102;  on  illicit  trade,  125. 

Money  currency,  23,  28-30,  64  n., 
81  n.,  105. 

Munday,  Captain  Henry,  80  n.,  96 
and  n.,  131. 

Mundays.  family  of  merchants, 
96. 

Muschamp,  Collector,  123  n. 

Narrative  of  a  Voyage  to  Mary- 
land, II,  81,  91. 

Naval  officers,  32  n.,  93,  122. 

Naval  stores,  production  en- 
couraged by  English  govern- 
ment, 52,  53,  55;  by  colonial 
government,  52-53.  54,  55-56; 
colony  suitable  for,  52,  53-54; 
small    amount    exported,    56, 


597] 


INDEX 


155 


134-138;  small  value  of,  56-57; 
production  a  failure  in  Mary- 
land, 56. 

Navigation  Acts.  See  Acts  of 
Trade. 

Negroes,  24,  64  n.,  76,  79-81,  107, 

108,  128,  129  n. 
Nevis,  113. 

Newcastle,  Delavi^are,   118,  128  n. 

New  England,  imports  from,  15, 
20,  75,  82 ;  exports  to,  16,  Z^  n., 
75 ;  naval  stores  in,  S3,  54  and 
n. ;  traders  in  Maryland,  75 ; 
negroes  from,  79  n.;  ships 
trading  in  Maryland,  81,  108  n., 

109,  110-113;  concerned  in 
illicit  trade  in  Maryland,  117. 

Newfoundland,  17,   117,  121. 

New  Providence,  iii,  112,  113. 

New  York,  exports  to,  17;  im- 
ports from,  21  n.,  82;  governor 
of,  49  and  n. ;  suitable  for 
naval  stores,  53;  transaction 
with  Maryland  in  bills  of  ex- 
change, 106;  ships  trading  in 
Maryland,  109,  110-113. 

Nicholson,  Governor,  9,  25,  27, 
36,  41  n.,  49  n.,  53,  65,  69,  71, 
74.  77'  79,  86,  88  n.,  91,  97,  117, 
119,  120  n.,  121  and  n.,  122,  123, 
125,    126,    127,   128,   129,   130. 

Nott,  Colonel,  70. 

Orders  in  Council,  41,  126. 

Orinoco  tobacco.    See  Tobacco. 

Outports  in  England,  want  poor 
tobacco,  25 ;  buy  tobacco  in 
Maryland.  38;  want  several 
fleets  annually,  41 ;  concerned 
in  trade  with  Maryland,  75,  88, 
97;  number  of  vessels  from, 
88;  submissive  to  London  mer- 
chants, 95. 

Paggen,  Peter,  95,  106  n. 

Parliament,  99.  See  also  Acts  of 
Parliament. 

Patuxent  District,  31  n.,  32  n.,  33 
n.,  34  n.,  50,  79  n.,  89,  123. 

Patuxent  River,  9,  93. 

Penn,  William,  yz,  74,  75- 

Pennsylvania,  imports  from,  17- 
18,  21  n.,  83;  exports  to,  17; 
prohibition  of  imports  from, 
18;  coin  in,  30;  suitable  for 
naval   stores,   53;    controversy 


over  reexported  European 
goods,  73-76;  Scottish  mer- 
chants in,  108;  ships  trading  to 
Maryland,  109,  110-113;  illicit 
trade,  118,  119  n.,  120  n.,  128 
and  n. ;  pirates  in,  130,  131. 

Perry,  Micajah,  95. 

Pirates,  93,  96,  116,  129-132. 

Plater,  Collector  George,  iign., 
123  and  n. 

Pocomoke  District,  13  n.,  14  n., 
17  and  n.,  20  n.,  31  n.,  32  n.,  33 
n.,  34  n.,  8gn. 

Port  Lewes,  17  n.,  113. 

Potomac  District,  31  n.,  32  n.,  33 
n.,  34  n.,  89,  119  n. 

Potomac   River,   9,  93. 

Poverty  in  Maryland,  27-28,  39 
and   n.,   65. 

Povey,  John,  48,  49  n. 

Price  of  tobacco,  23,  35,  37-42,  66. 

Prince  George's  County,  114. 

Principio,  72. 

Privateers,  French.    See  France, 

Privy  Council,  24,  52,  75  n.,  92, 
93,  94,  98,  loi,  102,  106,  121, 
126  n. 

Prizes,  French.     See  France. 

Proclamations,  against  exporta- 
tion of  food-stuflfs,  15,  16; 
against  exportation  of  flesh, 
20;  against  English  grown  to- 
bacco, 22  and  n. ;  concerning 
rates  of  foreign  coins,  30,  105; 
against  exporting  tobacco  to 
foreign  countries.  85  n. ;  con- 
cerning trade  with  Pennsyl- 
vania, 128;  against  pirates,  130. 

Proprietary  period.  See  Balti- 
more, Lord. 

Proprietor.    See  Baltimore,  Lord. 

Providence,  82,  112. 

Quary,  Robert,  33  n.,  40,  41,  58 
n.,  94,  97,  loi,  104,  117  n.,  118, 
120  n.,    131. 

Randolph,  Edward,  15,  36  n.,  53, 
105  n.,  108,  116,  117,  118  and  n., 
ii9n.,  120  n.,  123  n.,  126  n.,  127. 

Regrating.    See  Forestalling. 

Revenue,  to  Maryland  from  fur 
trade,  12,  13 ;  to  England  from 
tobacco,  42,  43,  45-46 ;  to  Mary- 
land from  tobacco,  47-51;  to 
Maryland      from      reexported 


156 


INDEX 


[598 


European  goods,  74;  to  Mary- 
land  from  white  servants,  78. 

Rhode  Island,  21  n.,  120  n. 

Rousby,  Christopher,  son. 

Royal  African  Company,  107. 

Rum.    See  Liquors. 

Russia,  100,  101-102. 

St.  Mary's  County,  114. 

Salary  of  royal  governor  in 
Maryland,  47,  48. 

Scotland,  trade  with,  81  n.,  108, 
117,  118  and  n.,  119  and  n. 

Secretary  of  State,  9,  S4>  65  n., 
69,  89  n.,  92  n. 

Securities.  See  Bonds  and  se- 
curities. 

Servants,  Irish  Catholic.  See 
Ireland. 

Settlements,  French.    See  France. 

Seymour,  Governor,  20,  27,  39  n., 
43,  48,  54  and  n.,  55,  64,  65,  66, 
71,  'J2.  75,  78,  79 n.,  Son.,  82, 
83  n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  92  n.,  98,  103, 
107,  108,  109,  115,  119,  122,  124  n. 

Ships,  number  in  English  trade, 
85-88;  in  intercolonial  trade, 
110-113;  owned  in  Maryland, 
109,    114-116. 

Shoes,  72. 

Shrewsbury,  Duke  of.  See  Sec- 
retary of  State. 

Slaves.     See  Negroes. 

Slye,  Gerard,  54  n..  56. 

Smuggling.     See  Trade,  illicit. 

Somerset  County,  9,  62,  71,  114, 
118  n.,  129  n. 

South  Carolina.    See  Carolinas. 

Spain,  100,  loi,  102,  108. 

Spotswood,  Governor,  69. 

Stores  in  Maryland,  103,  104. 

Stoughton,  Governor,  17. 

Surveyor,  riding,  128. 

Surveyors  of  the  Customs,  50, 
51,  loi,  122,  128. 

Sweden.     See  Baltic  countries. 

Talbot  County,  60,  114,  ii5- 

Thames  River,  45,  100. 

Tobacco,  the  staple  of  Maryland, 
15,  18,  21,  24-25,  51,  57;  58,  69. 
70;  first  grown  in  Virginia,  21, 
22,  23 ;  regulation  and  protec- 
tion by  English  government, 
21-22,  42-43.  45,  46,  49-50,  52, 
55,  56,  85  and  n.,  97,  98,  99,  100, 


loi,  102,  116,  120-121 ;  price  in 
Virginia,  23,  38-39",  regulation 
of  quality  and  quantity  in 
Maryland,  23-24,  25-26;  pack- 
ing of  stalks,  25  and  n.,  26  and 
n. ;  amount  grown  in  Maryland, 
25;  Orinoco,  inferior  variety, 
25,  70,  99;  quality  of  Mary- 
land, 25-26;  bad  condition  of 
trade,  27-28,  39,  61 ;  use  as 
medium  of  exchange,  22,,  28-30, 
105 ;  amount  exported  to  Eng- 
land, 30-36,  47;  to  English 
colonies,  36,  47;  methods  of 
selling,  2>7,  38,  102-104;  price 
of,  35.  37-42,  66;  effect  of 
wars  on  trade,  39-40,  42;  Eng- 
lish duties  on,  Zl,  40,  43-45, 
46,  99,  100;  effects  of  fleets 
on  price  of,  40-42,  94;  revenue 
in  England  from,  42,  45-46; 
evasion  of  English  duties  on, 
46 ;  revenue  in  Maryland  from, 
47-51;  colonial  duties  on,  47; 
salary  of  governor  from  duty 
on,  47-48;  penny  a  pound  on, 
50-51;  value  of  exported,  63; 
cheap  labor  essential  to  culti- 
vation of,  76,  "]■],  78;  London 
the  center  for  trade  in,  87-88; 
outports  concerned  in  trade  in, 
38,  88;  methods  of  loading,  89- 
90,  94;  influence  of  London 
merchants  on  trade  in,  95-102; 
freight  rates  on,  zi^  54-  96; 
bulk,  97;  size  of  hogsheads 
for,  97-99;  trade  with  Conti- 
nent in,  100-102;  illicit  trade 
in,  116,  117,  119  n.,  120  n.,  127- 
128. 

Tonnard,  Andrew,  54. 

Towns  in  Maryland,  67,  89,  90, 
103. 

Trade,  illicit,  in  England,  46; 
ways  of  evading  Acts  of  Trade, 
116;  in  New  England  ships, 
117,  118  n.;  constant  before 
1696,  117,  118,  127;  with  Scot- 
land, I17-I19;  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, 118,  ii9n.,  120  n.;  little 
in  Maryland  after  1696,  119, 
120  and  n. ;  action  of  Eng- 
lish government  against,  120, 
121 ;  of  colonial  government 
against,  121-127;  bonds  and 
securities,    122-125;   boat  used 


599] 


INDEX 


157 


for  detection  of,  126;  attitude 
of  inhabitants  toward,  127; 
evasions  of  colonial  acts,  127- 
129;  with  Pennsylvania,  128 
and  n. 

Trade  routes,  to  England,  85-89; 
to  Africa,  107;  to  foreign 
countries,  108;  to  other  colo- 
nies, 109-114. 

Treasury,  25,  40,  50  n.,  99  n., 
120  n. 

Upper  House  of  Assembly,   24, 

29  n.,  39  n.,  67. 
Utrecht,  Treaty  of,  80. 

Virginia,  9,  21  n.,  22,  24,  33,  36 
and  n.,  40,  41,  46,  Si>  58  and  n., 
59,  62,  63,  69,  70,  73  n.,  94,  95, 
96,  102,  103,  107,  109,  117,  ii9n.; 
cattle  imported  into  Maryland 
from,  19;  tobacco  first  grown 
in,  21-23;  sends  tobacco  only 
to  England,  22,  85  n. ;  price  of 
tobacco  in,  23,  69;  laws  regu- 
lating tobacco  in,  23  and  n., 
24,  26  n. ;  grows  better  tobacco 
than  Maryland,  24,  25,  26; 
amount  of  tobacco  exported 
from,  33-35;  bill  for  ports  in. 


43;  naval  stores  in,  53,  54  n., 
56,  134-138;  encourages  manu- 
factures, 67,  68  n.;  scarcity  of 
goods  in,  64,  65,  66,  69-70; 
little  manufacturing  in,  69-70, 
72 ;  exports  European  goods 
free  through  Maryland,  73,  75 ; 
price  of  negroes  in,  81 ;  ships 
leaving,  86,  91,  92  n.,  93;  size 
of  tobacco  hogsheads  in,  98 
and  n.,  99;  law  on  protested 
bills  of  exchange  in,  106; 
Scottish  merchants  in,  108; 
trade  routes  with  other  colo- 
nies, 109;  ships  trading  to 
Maryland,  iio-ii3- 
Virginia  Company.    See  Virginia. 

West  Indies,  79,  82,  91,  lOS,  109, 

Ii5n- 
West  Jersey,  113. 
White  servants,  24,  76-78. 
Wines.    See  Liquors. 
Wool,  43,  6s,  66,  67,  69,  70,  71, 

72,  141. 

Yoakleys,   family  of   merchants, 
96. 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 
Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy 

and  Political  Science 


Thirty-third  Series,  1915 


The  University  Studies  will  continue  to  publish,  as  heretofore, 
the  results  of  recent  investigations  in  History,  Political  Economy 
and  Political  Science. 

For  the  year  1915  the  titles  given  below  are  now  announced; 
other  numbers  will  follow  from  time  to  time. 

The  Constitutional  Doctrines  of  Justice  Harlan. 

By  Floyd  Barzilia  Clark. 

Prices  and  Currency  in  Maryland,  1720-1765.  By 

Clarence  P.  Gould. 

The  Helper  and  American  Trade  Unions.    By  John 

H.  ASHWORTH. 

Political  Parties  in  Virginia  on  the  Eve  of  Seces- 
sion.    By  D.  S.  Freeman. 

The  Negro  in  the  District  of  Columbia.    By  W.  T. 

Lapeade. 

The  cost  of  subscription  for  the  regular  annual  series,  com- 
prising about  600  pages,  is  $3.00.  Single  numbers,  or  special 
monographs,  at  special  prices.  Complete  contents  of  previous 
volumes  given  on  pages  ii-v. 

i 


JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 

Edited  by  HERBERT  B.  ADAMS,  1882-1901 

•  Not  sold  separately. 

FIRST  SERIES.— 1883.— $4.00. 

I.  An  Introduction  to  American  Institutional  History.    By  E.  A.  Freeman.     25  cents. 

II.  The  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Towns.     By  H.  B.  Adams.     50  cents. 

III.  Local  Government  in  Illinois.     By   Albekt   Shaw. — Local  Government  in  Pennsyl- 
vania.    By  E.  R.  L.  GoDLD.     30  cents. 

rv.  Saxon  Tithingmen  in  America.     By  H.  B.  Adams.     50  cents. 

V.  Local  Government  in  Michigan  and  the  Northwest.    By  E.  W.  Bbmis,     25  cents. 

VI.  Parish  Institutions  of  Maryland.     By  Edward  Ingle.     40  cents. 

VII.  Old  Maryland  Manors.    By  John  Hbmsley  Johnson.     30  cents. 

VIII.  Norman  Constables  in  America.    By  H.  B.  Adams.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  Village  Communities  of  Cape  Ann  and  Salem.    By  H.  B.  Adams.     50  cents. 

XI.  The  Genesis  of  a  New  England  State.    By  A.  Johnston.    30  cents. 
*XII.  Local  Government  and  Schools  in  South  Carolina.     By  B.  J.  Ramaqb. 

SECOND  SERIES.— 1884.— $4-00. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  sets.) 
•I-II.  Methods  of  Historical  Study.     By  H.  B.  Adams. 

III.  The  Past  and  Present  of  Political  Economy.    By  R.  T.  Ely.     35  cents. 

IV.  Samuel  Adams,  the  Man  of  the  Town  Meeting.     By  James  K.  Hosmbr.     35  cents. 
V-VI.  Taxation  in  the  United  States.    By  Henry  Carter  Adams.    50  cents. 

VII.  Institutional  Beginnings  in  a  Western  State.     By  Jesse  Macy.     25  cents. 
VIII-IX.  Indian  Money  in  New  England,  etc.     By  William  B.  Weeden.     50  cents. 
*X.  Town  and  County  Government  in  the  Colonies.     By  B.  Channing. 

*XI.  Rudimentary  Society  among  Boys.     By  J.  Hbmsley  Johnson. 

XII.  Land  Laws  of  Mining  Districts.     By  C.  H.  Shinn.     50  cents. 

-"  THIRD  SERIES.— 1885.— $4.00. 

I.  Maryland's  Influence  upon  Land  Cessions  to  the  IT.  S.    By  H.  B.  Adams.     75  cents. 
*II-III.  Virginia  Local  Institutions.    By  E.  Ingle.     75  cents. 

IV.  Recent  American  Socialism.     By  Richard  T.  Ely.     50  cents. 
V-VI-VII.  Maryland  Local  Institutions.     By  Lewis  W.  Wii.hblm.     fl.OO. 

VIII.  Influence  of  the  Proprietors  in  Founding  New  Jersey.     By  A.  Scott.     25  cents. 
IX-X.  American  Constitutions.     By  Horace  Davis.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  The  City  of  Washington.    By  J.  A.  Porter.     50  cents. 

FOURTH    SERIES.— 1886.— $3-50. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  sets.) 
I.  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  River.    By  I.  Eltino.     50  cents. 
II-III.  Town  Government  in  Rhode  Island.     By  W.  B.  Foster. — The  Narragansett  FUBt- 

ers.     By  Edward  Channing.     50  cents. 
•IV.  Pennsylvania  Boroughs.     Bv  William  P.  Holcomb. 

V.  Introduction  to  Constitutional  History  of  the  States.     By  J.  F.  Jameson.     50  cents. 
•VI.  The  Puritan  Colony  at  Annapolis,  Maryland.     By  D.  R.  Randall. 

VII-VIII-IX.  The  Land  Question  in  the  United  States.     By  S.  Sato.     $1.00. 
X.  Town  and  City  Government  of  New  Haven.     By  C.  H.  Levhrmorb.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies.     By  M.  Egleston.     50  cents. 

FIFTH  SERIES.— 1887.— 53-50. 
I-II.  City  Government  of  Philadelphia.    By  E.  P.  Allinson  and  B.  Pbnbosh.     50  centa 

III.  City  Government  of  Boston.    By  James  M.  Bugbee.     25  cents, 
•rv.  City  Government  of  St.  Louis.     By  Marshall  S.   Snow. 

V-VI.  Local  Government  in  Canada.     By  John  George  Bourinot.    50  cents. 

VII.  Effect  of  the  War  of  1812  upon  the  American  Union.     By  N.  M.  Bdtler.     25  cents. 

VIII.  Notes  on  the  Literature  of  Charities.    By  Herbert  B.  Adams.     25  cents. 

IX.  Predictions  of  Hamilton  and  De  Tocqueville.     By  Jambs  Brycb.     25  cents. 

X.  The  Study  of  History  in  England  and  Scotland.     By  P.  Fredbeicq.     25  cents. 

XI.  Seminary  Lihraries  and  University  Extension.     By  H.  B.  Adams.     25  cents. 

XII.  European  Schools  of  History  and  Politics.     By  A.  D.  White.     25  cents. 

SIXTH  SERIES.— 1888.— ?3-50. 
The  History  of  Co-operation  in  the  United  States. 

SEVENTH  SERIES.— I  Sgg. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 
I.  Arnold  Toynhee.     By  F.  C.  Montague.     50  cents.  ,-«        i» 

II-III.  Municipal  Government  in  San  Francisco.     By  Bernard  Moshs.     50  cents. 

IV.  Municipal  History  of  New  Orleans.     By  Wm.  W.  Howe.     25  cents. 
•V-Vl.  Ensrlish  Culture  in  Virginia.     By  William  P.  Trent. 

Vll-Vin-IX.  The  River  Towns  of  Connecticut.     By  Charles  M.  Andbbws.     |1.00. 
•X-XI-XII.  Federal    Government    in    Canada.      By    John    G.    Bookinot. 

ii 


EIGHTH   SERIES.— 1890. 

(Volume  Bold  eoly  with  complete  set.) 
I-II.  The  Beginnings  of  American  Nationality.     By  A.  W.  Small.     $1.00. 
III.  Local  Government  in  Wisconsin,      liy  D.  K.  Si'Encbk.     25  cents. 
•IV,  Spanish  Colonization  in  the  Southwest.     By  F.  W.  Blackmar. 
V-VI.  The  Study  of  History  in  Germany  and  France.     By  P.  Fkbdbricq.     $1.00. 
VII-IX.  Progress  of  the  Colored  People  of  Maryland.     By  J.  R.  Brackbtt.     $1.00. 
•X.  The    Study    of    History    in    Belgium    and    Holland.      By    1'.    Fkbdbricq. 
XI-XII.  Seminary  Notes  on  Historical  Literature.    By  H.  B.  Adams  and  others.    50  cents. 

NINTH  SERIES.— 1891. 

(Volume  sold  only  with  complete  set.) 
•I-II.  Government  of  the  United  States.    By  W.  W.  Willodghby  and  W.  F.  WiLLonoHBT. 
III-IV.  University    Education    in    Maryland.      By    B.    C.    Steinbr.      The   Johns    Hopklni 

University   (1876-1891).     By  D.  C.  Oilman.     50  cents. 
•V-VI.  Municipal  Unity  in  the  Lombard  Communes.     By  W.  K.  Williams. 
VII-VIII.  Public  Lands  of  the  Roman  Republic.    By  A.  Stephenson.     75  cents. 

IX.  Constitutional  Bevelopment  of  Japan.    By  T.  Iybnaga.    50  cents. 
•X.  A  History  of  Liberia.     By  J.  H.  T.  McPherson. 

XI-XII.  The  Indian  Trade  in  Wisconsin.    By  F.  J.  Tdenbr.    50  cents. 

TENTH  SERIES.— 1892.— $3.50. 
I.  The  Bishop  Hill  Colony.     By  Michael  A.  Mikkelsen.     50  cents. 
II-III.     Church  and  State  in  New  England.     By  Paul  E.  Lader.     50  cents. 
rv.  Church  and  State  in  Maryland.    By  George  Petrib.     50  cents. 
V-VI.  Religious  Development  of  North  Carolina.     By  S.  B.  Weeks.     50  cents. 

VII.  Maryland's  Attitude  in  the  Struggle  for  Canada.    By  J.  W.  Black.     50  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Quakers  in  Pennsylvania.     By  A.  C.  Applegakth.     75  cents. 

X-XI.  Columbus  and  his  Discovery  of  America.     By  H.  B.  Adams  and  H.  Wood.     50  cents. 
XII.  Causes  of  the  American  Revolution.     By  J.  A.  Woodborn.     50  cents. 

ELEVENTH  SERIES.— 1893.— $3-5o. 

I.  The  Social  Condition  of  Labor.    By  E.  R.  L.  Gould.     50  cents. 

II.  The  World's  Representative  Assemblies  of  To-Day.     By  E.  K.  Aldbn.     50  cents. 
III-IV.  The  Negro  in  the  District  of  Columbia.    By  Edward  Ingle.     $1.00. 

V-VI.  Church  and  State  in  North  Carolina.     By  Stephen  B.  Weeks.     50  cents. 
VII-VIII.  The  Condition  of  the  Western  Farmer,  etc.     By  A.  F.  Bentlby.     $1.00. 
IX-X.  History  of  Slavery  in  Connecticut.    By  Bernard  C.  Steiner.     75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Local  Government  in  the  South.    By  B.  W.  Bemis  and  others.     $1.00. 

TWELFTH  SERIES.— 1894.— $3.50. 
I-II.  The    Cincinnati    Southern    Railway.     By    J.    H.    Holi.ander.     $1.00. 

III.  Constitutional  Beginnings  of  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  Bassbtt.     50  cents. 

rv.  Struggle  of  Dissenters  for  Toleration  in  Virginia.     By  H.  R.  McIlwainb.  50  cents. 

V-VI-VII.  The  Carolina  Pirates  and  Colonial  Commerce.     By  S.  C.  Hdghson.  $1.00. 

VIII-IX.  Representation  and  Suffrage  in  Massachusetts.     By  G.  H.  Haynbs.  50  cents. 

X.  English  Institutions  and  the  American  Indian.     By  J.  A.  James.     25  cents. 
XI-XII.  International  Beginnings  of  the  Congo  Free  State.    By  J.  S.  Rbevbs.  50  cents. 

THIRTEENTH  SERIES.— 1895.— $3-50. 
I-II.  Government  of  the  Colony  of  South  Carolina.    By  B.  L.  Whitney.     75  cents. 
Ill-rV.  Early   Relations   of   Maryland   and  Virginia.     By    J.    H.    LatanS.     50   cents. 

V.  The  Rise  of  the  Bicameral  System  in  America.     By  T.  F.  Moran.     50  cents. 
VI-VII.  White  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  Virginia.     By  J.  C.  Ballagh.     50  cents. 

VIII.  The  Genesis  of  California's  First  Constitution.     By  R.  D.  Hdnt.     50  cents. 

IX.  Benjamin  Franklin  as  an  Economist.     By  W.  A.  Wetzel.     50  cents. 

X.  The  Provisional  Government  of  Maryland.     By  J.  A.  Silver.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  Government  and  Religion  of  the  Virginia  Indians.    By  S.  R.  Hendbek-    50  cents 

FOURTEENTH  SERIES.— 1896.— $350. 

I.  Constitutional  History  of  Hawaii.     By  Henry  E.  Chambers.     25  cents. 

II.  City  Government  of  Baltimore.     By  Thaddbds  P.  Thomas.     25  cents. 

III.  Colonial  Origins  of  New  England  Senates.     By  F.  L.  Riley.     50  cents. 
IV-V.  Servitude  in  the  Colony  of  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  Bassbtt.     50  cents. 
VI-VII.  Representation  in  Virginia.     By  J.  A.  C.  Chandler.     50  cents. 

VIII.  History  of  Taxation  in  Connecticut  (1636-1776).       By  F.  R.  Jones.     50  cents. 
IX-X.  A  Study  of  Slavery  in  New  Jersey.     By  Henry  S.  Cooley.     50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Causes  of  the  Maryland  Revolution  of  1689.    By  F.  E.  Sparks.     50  cents. 

FIFTEENTH  SERIES.— 1897.— 53-50. 
I-II.  The  To"bacco  Industry  in  Virginia  since  1860.    By  B.  W.  Arnold.    50  cents. 
III-V.  Street  Railway  System  of  Philadelphia.     By  F.  W.  Speirs.     75  cents. 

VI.  Daniel  Raymond.     By  C.  P.  Nbill.     50  cents. 

VII-VIII.  Economic  History  of  B.  &  0.  R.  R.     By  M.  Reizenstein.     50  cents. 

IX.  The  South  American  Trade  of  Baltimore.    By  F.  R.  Ruttbr.     50  cents. 

X-XI.  State  Tax  Commissions  in  the  United  States.     By  J.  W.  Chapman.     50  cents. 
XII.  Tendencies  I9  American  Economic  Thought.    By  S.  Sherwood.     25  cents. 

SIXTEENTH  SERIES.— 1898.— $3.50. 
I-IV.  The  Neutrality  of  the  American  Lakes,  etc.    By  J.  M.  Callahan.    $1.25.    Cloth,  $1.50, 

V.  West  Florida.     By  H.  E.  Chambers.     25  cents. 

VI.  Anti-Slavery  Leaders  of  North  Carolina.    By  J.  S,  Bassbtt.    50  cents. 
VII-IX.  Life  and  Administration  of  Sir  Robert  Eden.    By  B.  C.  Steinbr.     $1.00. 
X-XI.  The  Transition  of  North  Carolina  from  a  Colony.     By   E.   W.   Sikbs.     50  cents. 
XII.  Jared  Sparks  and  Alexis  De  Tocaueville.    By  H.  B.  Adams.    25  cents. 

iii 


SEVENTEENTH  SERIES.— 1899.— $3.50. 

I-II-III.  History   of   State   Banking   in   Maryland.^  By    A.    C.    Bryan.     $1.00. 
IV-V.  Tlio  Know-Nothing  Party  in  Maryland.    By  L.  F.  Schmeckebier.    75  cents. 

VI.  The  Labadist  Colony  in  Maryland.     By  B.  B.  James.     50  cents. 
VII-VIII.  History  of  Slavery  in  North  Carolina.     By  J.  S.  Bassett.     75  cents. 
IX-X-XI.  Bevelopment  of  the  Chesapeake  &  Ohio  Canal.     By  G.  W.  Ward.     75  cents. 
XII.  Public  Educational  Work  in  Baltimore.    By  Herbert  B.  Adams.    25  cents. 

EIGHTEENTH  SERIES.— 1900.— $3.50. 

I-IV.  studies  in  State  Taxation.    Edited  by  J.  H.  Hollander.    Paper,  $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.25. 
V-VI.  The  Colonial  Executive  Prior  to  the  Restoration.    By  P.  L.  Kayb.    50  cents. 

VII.  Constitution  and  Admission  of  Iowa  into  the  Union.     By  J.  A.  Jambs.    30  cents. 
VIII-IX.  The  Church  and  Popular  Education.     By  H.  B.  Adams,     50  cents. 
X-XII.  Religious  Treedom  in  Virginia:  The  Baptists.     By  W.  T.  Thom.     75  cents. 

NINETEENTH  SERIES.— 1 901. —$3.50. 

I-III.  America  in  the  Pacifc  and  the  Far  East.    By  J.  M.  Callahan.    75  cents. 

IV-V.  State  Activities  in  Relation  to  Labor.    By  VV.  P.  Willodghby.    50  cents. 

VI-VII.  History  of  Suffrage  in  Virginia.    By  J.  A.  C.  Chandler.     50  cents. 

VIII-IX.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1864.     By  W.  S.  Myers.     50  cents. 

X.  Life  of  Commissary  James  Blair.     By  D.  E.  Motley.     25  cents. 

XI-XII.  Gov.  Hicks  of  Maryland  and  the  Civil  War.    By  G.  L.  Radcliffb.    50  cents. 

TWENTIETH    SERIES.— 1902.— $3.50. 

I.  Western  Maryland  in  the  Revolution.     By  B.  C.  Steiner.     30  cents. 

II-III.  State  Banks  since  the  National  Bank  Act.    By  G.  E.  Barnbtt.     50  cents. 

IV.  Early  History  of  Internal  Improvements  in  Alabama.     By  W.  E.  Martin.     80  cents. 
*V-VI.  Trust  Companies  in  the  United  States.     By  George  Cator. 

VII-VIII.  The  Maryland  Constitution  of  1851.     By  J.  W.  Harry.     50  cents. 

IX-X.  Political  Activities  of  Philip  Freneau.     By  S.  E.  Forman.     50  cents. 

XI.-XK.  Continental  Opinion  on  a  Middle  European  Tariff  Union.    By  G.  M.  FiSK.    30  cts. 

TWENTY-FIRST  SERIES.— 1903.— $3.50. 

I-II.  The  Wabash  Trade  Route.    By  E.  J.  Benton.    50  cents. 

III-IV.  Internal  Improvements  in  North  Carolina.     By  C.  C.  Weaver.     50  cents. 

V.  History  of  Japanese  Paper  Currency.     By  M.  Takaki.     30  cents. 

VI-VII.  Economics    and    Politics    in    Maiyland,    1720-1760,    and    the  Public    Services    of 

Daniel  Dulany  the  Elder.     By  St.  G.  L.   Sioussat.     50  cents. 

VIII-IX-X.  Beginnings  of  Maryland,  1631-1639.     By  B.  C.  Steinbr.  75  cents. 

XI-XII.  The  English  Statutes  in  Maryland.    By  St.  G.  L.  Siodssat.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-SECOND  SERIES.— 1904.— $3.50. 
I-II.  A  Trial  Bibliography  of  American  Trade-Union  Publications.    50  cents. 
III-IV.  White  Servitude  in  Maryland,  1634-1820.     By  E.  I.  McCormac.     50  cents. 
V.  Switzerland  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Sixteenth  Century.    By  J.  M.  Vincent.     30  cents. 
VI-VII-VIII.  The  History  of  Reconstruction  in  Virginia.     By  H.  J.  Eckbneodb.     50  etc 
IX-X.  The  Foreign  Commerce  of  Japan  since  the  Restoration.    By  Y.  Hattobi.    50  cents. 
XI-XII.  Descriptions  of  Maryland.     By  B.  C.  Steinee.     50  cents. 

TWENTY-THIRD  SERIES.— 1905.— 53-50. 

I-II.  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina.    By  J.  P.  Holi.is.     50  cents, 

III-IV.  State  Government  in  Maryland,  1777-1781.    By  B.  W.  Bond,  Jb.     50  cents. 

V-VI.  Colonial  Administration  under  Lord  Clarendon,  1660-1667.    By  P.  L.  ELayb,    50  cts. 

VII-VIII.  Justice  in  Colonial  Virginia.     By  O.  P.  Chitwooo.     50  cents, 

IX-X.  The  Napoleonic  Exiles  in  America,  181.5-1819.    By  J.  S.  Rbevbs.     50  cents. 

XI-XII.  Municipal  Problems  in  Mediaeval  Switzerland.    By  J.  M.  ViNCBNT.  50  cents. 

TWENTY-FOURTH  SERIES.— 1Q06.— $3.50. 
I-II.  Spanish-American  Diplomatic  Relations  before  1898.  By  H.  E.  Flack.  50  cents. 
III-IV.  The  Finances  of  American  Trade  Unions.  By  A.  M.  Sakolski,  75  cents, 
V-VI.  Diplomatic  Negotiations  of  the  United  States  with  Russia.  By  J,  C,  Hildt.  50  cts. 
VII-VIII.  State  Rights  and  Parties  in  North  Carolina,  1776-1831.  By  H.  M.  Wagstaff.  50c. 
IX-X.  National  Labor  Federations  in  the  United  States.  By  William  Kirk,  75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Maryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars.     Part  I.     By  B.  C.  Stbineb.     50  cents. 

TWENTY-FIFTH  SERIES.— 1907.— $3.50. 

I.  Internal  Taxation  in  the  Philippines.     By  John  S.  Hobd.     30  cents. 
II-III.  The  Monroe  Mission  to  France,  1794-1796.     By  B.  W.  Bond,  Jr.     50  cents. 
IV-V.  Maryland  During  the  English  Civil  Wars,  Part  II.    By  Bernard  C.  Stbiner.    50c, 
VI-VII.  The  State  in  Constitutional  and  International  Law.     By  R,  T.  Crane.     50  cents. 
VIII-IX-X.  Financial  History  of  Maryland,   1789-1848.     By  Hugh  S.  Hanna.     75  cents. 
XI-XII.  Apprenticeship  in  American  Trade  Unions.    By  J.  M.  Motley.    50  cents. 

TWENTY-SIXTH  SERIES.— 1908.— $3.50. 
I-III.  British  Committees,   Commissions,   and  Councils  of  Trade  and  Plantations,   1622- 

1675.     By  C.  M.  Andrews.     75  cents. 
IV-VI.  Neutral  Rights  and  Obligations  in  the  Anglo-Boer  War,     By  R.  G.   Campbell, 

75  cents. 
VII-VIII,  The  Elizabethan  Parish  in  its  Ecclesiastical  and  Financial  Aspects.    By  S.  L. 

Ware.     50  cents. 
IX-X.  A  Study  of  the  Topography  and  Municipal  History  of  Praeneste.     By   R.   V.   D. 

Magoffin,     50  cents. 
•XI-XII.  Beneficiary  Features  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  J.  B.  Kennedy. 

iv 


TWENTY-SEVENTH   SERIES.— 1909.— $3.50. 

I-II.  The  Self-Reconstruction  of  Maryland,  18G4-18C7.     By  W.  S.  Myers.     50  cents. 
III-IV-V.  The    Development    of    the    English    Law    of    Conspiracy.     By    J.    W.    Bkyan. 

75  cents. 
VI-VII.  Legislative    and    Judicial    History    of    the    Fifteenth    Amendment.     By    J.    M. 

Mathews.     75  cents;  cloth  $1. 
VIII-XII.  England  and  the  French  Revolution,   1789-1797.     By   W.  T.  Laprade.     $1. 

TWENTY-EIGHTH  SERIES.— 1910.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

I.  History  of  Reconstruction  in  Louisiana    (Through  1868).     By  J.  R.  Ficklbn.     ?1.00; 

cloth  $1.25. 

II.  The  Trade  Union  Label.     By  E.  R.  Spedden.      50  cents  ;  cloth  75  cents. 

III.  The  Doctrine   of  Non-Suability  of  the  State  in  the  United  States.     By  K.   Sinqb- 
WALD.     50  cents ;  cloth  75  cents. 

IV.  David  Eicardo:  A  Centenary  Estimate.       By  J.  H.  Hollandee.     $1.00;  cloth  $1.25. 

TWENTY-NINTH  SERIES.— 1911.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  three  numbers.) 

I.  Maryland  Under  the  Commonwealth:  A  Chronicle  of  the  years  1649-1658.     By  B.  C. 

Steiner.     ?1  ;  cloth,   $1.25. 

II.  The  Dutch  Republic  and  the  American  Revolution.     By  Feiedrich  Edlee.     $1.50 ; 

cloth  §1.75. 

III.  The  Closed  Shop  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  T.  Stockton.    ?1.00  ;  cloth  $1.25. 

THIRTIETH  SERIES.— 1912.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  three  numbers.) 

I.  Recent  Administration  in  Virginia.     Bv  F.  A.  Mageudee.     ?1.25  ;  cloth,  $1.50. 

II.  The  Standard  Rate  in  American  Trade  Unions.     By  D.   A.   McCabh.     $1.25;   cloth 

$1.50. 

III.  Admission  to  American  Trade  Unions.     By  F.  E.  Wolfe.     $1.00 ;  doth  $1.25. 

THIRTY-FIRST    SERIES.— 1913.— $3.50. 

(Complete  in  four  numbers.) 

I.  The  Land  System  in  Maryland,  1720-1765.     By  Claeencb  P.  Gould.     75  cents ;  cloth, 

.fl.OO. 

II.  The  Government  of  American  Trade  Unions.     By  T.  W.  Glockee.     $1.00 ;  cloth,  $1.25. 

III.  The  Free   Negro  in  Virginia,   1619-1865.     By  J.   H.   Russell.     $1.00;   cloth,   $1.25. 

IV.  The  ftuinquennales :  An  Historical  Study.     By  R.  V.  D.  Magoffin.     50  cents ;  cloth 
75  cents. 

THIRTY-SECOND  SERIES.— 1914-— $3-5o. 
(Complete  in  three  numbers.) 

I.  Jurisdiction    in    American    Building-Trades    Unions.    By    N.    B.    Whitney.     $1.00 ; 

cloth.  .$1.25. 

II.  Slavery  in  Missouri,   1804^1865.      Bv  H.  A.  Teexlee.     $1.25;  cloth  $1.50. 

III.  Colonial  Trade  of  Maryland.     By  M.  S.  Moeeiss.     $1.00 ;  cloth  $1.25. 

The  set  of  thirty-two  series  of  Studies  is  offered,  uniformly  bound  in  cloth,  for  library 

use  for  $112.00  net.     The  separate  volumes  may  also  be  had  bound  in 

cloth  at  prices  given. 


NOTES  SUPPLEMENTARY  TO  THE  STUDIES  IN  HISTORT  AND  POLITICS. 

PEICE   OF   THESE    NOTES,    TEN    CENTS    EACH,    UNLESS    OTHBEWISB    INDICATED. 

Municipal  Government  in  England.     By  Albeet  Shaw. 

Social  Work  in  Australia  and  London.     William  Geet. 

Encouragement  of  Higher  Education.     Prof.  H.  B.  Adams. 

The  Problem  of  City  Government,     Hon.  Seth  Low. 

The  Libraries  of  Baltimore.     By  P.  R.  Uhler. 

Work  Among  the  Workingwomen  of  Baltimore.     By  H.  B.  Adams. 

Charities:   The  Relation  of  the  State,  the  City,  and  the  Individual  to  Modern  PMIan- 

thropic  Work.     By  A.  G.  Warnee. 
Law  and  History.     By  Walter  B.   Scaife. 

The  Needs  of  Self-Supporting  Women.     By  Claba  de  Gbaffeneeid. 
Early  Presbyterianism  in  Maryland.     By  J.  W.  McIlvain. 
The  Educational  Aspect  of  the  U.  S.  National  Museum.     By  O.  T.  Mason. 
University  Extension  and  the  University  of  the  Future.     By  Richard  G.  Moulton. 
The  Philosophy  of  Education.     By  William  T.  Haeeis. 
Popular  Election  of  U.  S.   Senators.     By  John  Hatnes. 
A  Memorial  of  Lucius  S.  Merriam.     By  J.  H.  Hollander  and  others. 
Is  History  Past  Politics?     By  H.  B.  Adams. 
Lay  Sermons.     By  Amos  G.  Waenbb;  with  a  biographical  sketch  by  George  E.  Howard, 

Price  twenty-five  cents. 

V 


Extra  Volumes  of  Studies 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 

Those  marked  with  an  asterisk  (*)  are  out  of  print. 
*I.  The  Republic  of  New  Haven.    By  Charles  H.  Levermore.  342  pages. 
II.  Philadelphia,  1681-1887.     By  Edward  P.  Allison,  A.M.,  and  Boies  Pen- 
rose, A.B.    444  pages.     8vo.     Cloth.     $3.00. 
*III.  Baltimore   and    the   Nineteenth    of    April,    1861.     By    George    William 

Brown.     176  pages. 
IV.  Local  Constitutional  History  of  the  United  States.    By  George  E.  Howard, 
Ph.D. — Volume  I — Development  of  the  Township,  Hundred  and  Shire. 
542  pages.     8vo.     Cloth.     513.00. 
VI.  The  Negro  in  Maryland.     By  Jeffrey  R.  Brackett,  Ph.D.     270  pages. 

Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 
VII.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,    By  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Ph.D. 

124  pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $1.25. 
VIII.  The  Intercourse  between  the  U.  S.  and  Japan.     By  Inazo  (Ota)  Nitobe, 

Ph.D.     198  pages.     8vo.     Cloth.     $1.25. 
•IX.  State  and  Federal  Government  in  Switzerland.    By  John  Martin  Vincent. 
250  pages. 
X.  Spanish  Institutions  of  the  Southwest,     By  Frank  W.  Blackmah,  Ph.D. 
380    pages.      8vo.      Cloth.      $2.00. 
XI.  An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Constitution.     By  Morris  M.  Cohn. 

250  pages.     8vo.     Cloth.     $1.50. 
XII.  The  Old  English  Manor.     By  C.  M.  Andrews,  Ph.D.     280  pages.     Svo. 
Cloth,  $1.50. 
♦XIII.  America:   Its  Geographical  History,   1492-1892.     By  Walter  B.   Scaife. 

176  pages. 
♦XIV.  Florentine  Life  During  the  Renaissance.    By  Walter  B.  Scaife. 
*XV.  The  Southern  Quakers  and  Slavery.     By  Stephen  B.  Weeks,  Ph.D.     414 

pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 
XVI.  Contemporary   American   Opinion   of   the   French   Revolution.     By  C.   D. 
Hazen,  Ph.D.     325  pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 
♦  XVII.  Industrial  Experiments   in   the  British   Colonies   of   North  America.     By 

Eleanor  L.  Lord.     164  pages.     Svo.    Cloth.     $1.25. 
XVIII.  State  Aid  to  Higher  Education:  A  Series  of  Addresses  at  the  Johns  Hop- 
kins University.     100  pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $1.00. 
*  XIX.  Irrigation  in  Utah.    By  C.  H.  Bbodgh.     228  pages. 

XX.  Financial  History  of  Baltimore.    By  J.  H.  Hollander,  Ph.D.    400  pages. 

Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 
XXI.  Cuba  and  International  Relations.    By  J.  M.  Callahan.     503  pages.    Svo. 

Cloth.     $3.00. 
XXII.  The  American  Workman.     By  E.  Levasseur   (translation).     540  pages. 
Svo.     Cloth.     $3.00. 

XXIII.  Herbert  B.  Adams.     A  Memorial  Volume.     232  pages.     Svo.     Cloth. 

XXIV.  A  History  of  Slavery  in  Virginia.    By  J.  C.  Ballagii.     160  pages.     Svo. 

Cloth.      $1.50. 
XXV.  The  Finances  and  Administration  of  Providence,  1636-1901.     By  Howard 

K.  Stokes.    474  pages.    Svo.    Cloth.     $3.50. 
XXVI.  The   Adoption  of  the  Fourteenth   Amendment.     By   Horace   E.    Flack. 
286  pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 

NEW   SERIES. 

I.  The    Revision    and    Amendment    of    State    Constitutions.     W.    F.    Dodd. 
368  pages.     Svo.     Cloth.     $2.00. 
vi 


THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS  OF  BALTIMORE. 


American  Journal  of  Insanity.  Quarterly.  8vo.  Volume  LXXI  in  prog- 
ress.    $5  per  volume.     (Foreign  postage  fifty  cents.) 

American  Journal  of  Mathematics.  Frank  Morley,  Editor,  Quarterly. 
4to.  Volume  XXXVI  in  progress.  $5  per  volume.  (Foreign  postage 
fifty  cents.) 

American  Journal  of  Philology.  B.  L.  Gildersleeve,  Editor,  Quarterly. 
8vo.  Volume  XXXV  in  progress.  $3  per  volume.  (Foreign  postage 
fifty  cents.) 

Beitrage  zur  Assyriologie  und  semitischen  Sprachwissenschaft.  Paul 
Haupt  and  Friedrich  Delitzsch,   Editors.     Volume   X   in   progress. 

Elliott  Monographs  in  the  Romance  Languages  and  Literatures,  Edward 
C.  Armstrong,  Editor,    8vo.    $3  per  year. 

Hesperia.    Hermann  Collitz  and  James  W.  Bright,  Editors. 

Johns  Hopkins  Hospital  Bulletin.  Monthly.  4to,  Volume  XXV  in  prog- 
ress.    $2  per  year.     (Foreign  postage  fifty  cents.) 

Johns  Hopkins  Hospital  Reports.  4to.  Volume  XVII  in  progress.  $5  per 
volume.     (Foreign  postage  fifty  cents.) 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science. 
8vo.    Volume  XXXII  in  progress.    $3  per  volume. 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Circular,  including  the  President's  Report, 
Annual  Eegister,  and  Medical  Department  Catalogue.  T.  E.  Ball, 
Editor,     Monthly.     8vo.     Volume  XXXIII  in  progress,     $1  per  year. 

Modem  Language  Notes.  E.  C.  Armstrong,  J.  W.  Bright,  B.  J.  Vos,  and 
C,  C,  Harden  (Managing  Editor).  Monthly.  4to.  Volume  XXIX  in 
progress.     $2  per  volume.     (Foreign  postage  twenty-five  cents.) 

Report  of  the  Maryland  Geological  Survey. 

Reprints  of  Economic  Tracts.  J.  H.  Hollander,  Editor,  Third  Series  in 
progress.     $2  net. 

Terrestrial  Magnetism  and  Atmospheric  Electricity.  L,  A,  Batjee,  Editor. 
Quarterly.  8vo.  Volume  XIX  in  progress.  $3  per  volume.  (Foreign 
postage  twenty-five  cents.) 


Photographic   Reproduction    of   the   Kashmirian    Atharva-Veda,    M, 

Bloomfield,  Editor.     3  vols.     Folio.     $50, 
PoEMA  de  Fernan   GoNgALEZ.     Edited   by   C,   Carroll   Marden,     284  pp, 

$2.50  net. 
The  Taill  of  Eauf  Coiltear.     Edited  by  William  Hand  Browne.    164 

pp.  $1  net. 
A  New  Critical  Edition  of  the  Hebrew  Text  op  the  Old  Testament. 

Paul  Haupt,  Editor.     Prospectus  on  application. 
Studies  in  Honor  of  Professor  Gildersleeve,    527  pp.    $6  net. 
The  Physical  Papers  op  Henry  A.  Rowland,     716  pp.    $7.50  net. 
EccLESiASTES :    A    New    Metrical    Translation,     By   Paul    Haupt,     50    pp. 

50  cents  net. 
The  Book  of  Nahum:  A  New  Metrical  Translation.    By  Paul  Haupt,     53 

pp.     50  cents  net. 
The  Hague  Peace  Conferences  of  1899  and  1907.     By  James  Brown 

Scott.     Vol.  I,  The  Conferences,  887  pp.;  Vol.  II,  Documents,  548  pp, 

$5  net. 
Disturbing  Elements  in  the  Study  and  Teaching  op  Political  Economy. 

By  James  Bonar.     156  pp.     $1, 
The  Eclogues  of  Baptista  Mantuanus,    By  Winfred  P.  Mustard,     156 

pp,    $1.50. 
Diplomatic  Negotiations  op  American  Naval  Officers,  1778-1883.    By 

C.  O.  Paullin.     380  pp.     $2. 
Four  Phases  of  American  Development.    Federalism — Democracy — Im- 
perialism— Expansion,     By  J,  B.  Moore.     218  pp,     $1.50, 
A  complete  list  of  publicationa  sent  on  request 


THE  HAGUE  PEACE  CONFERENCES  OF 
1899  and  1907 

By  Hon.  JAMES  BROWN  SCOTT 

Solicitor  for  the  Department  of  State  and  Technical  Delegate  to  the 

Second  Conference. 

Two  Volumes.    8vo.    Cloth.    Price  $5.00. 

VOL.  I.    THE  CONFERENCES,  887  Pages. 

VOL.  IL    DOCUMENTS,  548  Pages. 

These  two  substantial  volumes  furnish  the  most  complete  account  of  the 
Conferences  which  has  appeared  in  English,  and  will  undoubtedly  be  ac- 
cepted as  the  definitive  account  of  the  work  of  those  two  great  gatherings. 
The  fact  that  the  author  was  the  Technical  Delegate  of  the  United  States 
to  the  Second  Conference  and  played  a  conspicuous  part  in  its  deliberations, 
adds  to  the  authoritative  value  of  the  treatise. 

The  Nation  says: 

"  Little  of  significance  has  escaped  our  author.  First,  here  are  your 
original  treaties  and  convention.  Secondly,  you  get  nearly  150  pages  of 
condensed  commentary  on  the  two  conferences.  Lastly,  you  have  an  ex- 
panded account  of  750  pages,  authoritative  and  circumstantial." 

Judge  Simeon  E.  Baldwin,  in  the  American  Political  Science  Revieio,  says: 
"  Professor  Scott  has  thus  not  only  given  the  general  public  a  clear  view 
of  the  formation  of  the  achievements  of  the  two  most  imposing  international 
congresses  ever  held,  but  put  the  student  of  public  law  who  desires  to  ex- 
amine them  more  closely,  in  possession  of  the  most  important  sources  of 
original  information." 

The  American  Historical  Review  says : 

"  There  has  been  great  need  of  a  volume  in  English  which  should  analyze 
the  work  of  the  Second  Hague  Conference  in  a  manner  at  once  interesting 
to  the  general  reader  and  satisfactory  to  students  and  teachers  of  inter- 
national law.  In  the  successful  accomplishment  of  this  task,  Professor 
Scott  deserves  our  heartiest  thanks." 

Orders  should  be  addressed  to 

The  Johns  Hopkins  Press, 

Baltimore,  Maryland^ 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


SkMi^^ 


«k;i'  IVOV 


Series  9482 


llllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllHIIIIIIIIIIi 
AA    000  588  108    1 


3  1205  00559  2801 


